ReviewFrontiers in public health2025
Integration and innovation: medical and health consortia improving continuing medical education in China.
Review in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating university emergency resilience with a focus on student safety and health.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) of medical staff toward behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) in medical institutions in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Large language models in emergency medicine education: opportunities, challenges, and implementation pathways.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Availability and convenience of sarcopenia screening and diagnostic tools in Chinese primary care.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in acute and critical care: current challenges and strategic solutions.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- The digital transformation of medical education collaborative governance in the era of smart education: an innovative management restructuring of medical talent cultivation systems.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Application and challenges of DeepSeek in primary care in China.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Primary health care (PHC) is the cornerstone of the healthcare system in China. The medical and health consortia (medical consortia) integrate resources of continuing medical education (CME) to bridge competency gaps among healthcare providers. This narrative review aims to explore the innovative models of CME within the framework of medical consortia. Methods: Searches were conducted in both Chinese and English databases to broaden the scope of the review, including China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, and PubMed. Chinese policy documents were retrieved from official websites of China's National Health Commission. The review analyzed existing policy documents (2010-2025) and relevant literature, supplemented by an institutional application example of the West China Hospital-Fangcao Community Health Service Center Medical Consortium to explore challenges and recommendations. Results: China developed a series of policies to promote the construction of medical consortia, with a focus on resource-sharing between tertiary and PHC institutions. A literature search yielded 196 articles, including qualitative studies, quantitative studies, and reviews, of which 48 met inclusion criteria in the review. Seven policy documents were included in the analysis. The synergy between medical consortia and CME brought benefits to both healthcare providers and the health system. Key innovations included clinical scenario-oriented training, remote consultation, and flexible training modalities. However, the reviewed literature highlighted persistent challenges, including regional disparities in resources, limited financial incentives for general practitioners (GPs), and a shortage of qualified trainers. Overcoming barriers such as regional resource disparities and improving the intrinsic motivation of GPs remained critical to the implementation of CME. Conclusion: Medical consortia offer platforms for the delivery of CME, while CME supports the development of medical consortia. These innovations enhance collaboration between specialists and GPs, thereby optimizing patient referrals and follow-up care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.