ReviewEClinicalMedicine2025
Can multidisciplinary teams improve the quality of primary care? A scoping review.
Review in EClinicalMedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Organisation, Financing, and Implementation of Preconception Care in Primary Care: Implications for Women's Health and Well-Being.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Primary Care or Primary Problem? Aligning Access Pathways with Patient Needs Across the Care Continuum.Journal of market access & health policy · 2026Article
- Exploring diverse applications of team-based care in preventive medicine: a scoping review.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Taking multidisciplinary team care from policy into primary care practice.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2026Article
- Comparing artificial intelligence and multidisciplinary tumor board decision making in real-world cancer care: a prospective blinded concordance study.ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2026Article
- Association between team functioning and self-efficacy and quality of life for primary care patients in British Columbia, Nova Scotia, and Ontario.Primary health care research & development · 2026Article
- A Dual-Perspective Comparison of Classical and Clinic-Based Multidisciplinary Team Models in Cancer Care: A Cross-Sectional and Qualitative Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Assessing the Critical Thinking and Training Needs of Healthcare Professionals, and Patient Experiences: An Exploratory Cross-Sectional Study in Primary Care of Crete, Greece.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- New Alzheimer's disease diagnostics and psychological clinical perspectives.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Experiences of families using an early example of a neighbourhood multidisciplinary care team for children and young people in Birmingham, UK: a qualitative exploration of acceptability.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Article
- Availability and convenience of sarcopenia screening and diagnostic tools in Chinese primary care.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There is increasing use of multi-disciplinary teams (MDT) to increase the quality of and access to primary care. For example, the promotion of MDTs in primary care is one of four recent major policy recommendations in Australia. This review sought to understand the impact of MDT on the quality of primary care, including continuity of care, and the enablers and barriers to implementation. Methods: A scoping review was undertaken of peer-reviewed journal articles published between 1 January 2014 and 13 August 2024. It is registered at OSF: DOI:10.17605/OSF.IO/23QYU. A search of PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, CINAHL, PAIS, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Scopus databases yielded 1603 records or 770 articles after duplicates were removed; 75 full-texts were reviewed and 27 studies met the inclusion criteria. The search was repeated for the period 13 August 2024 to 13 August 2025, which yielded a further 282 records after duplicates were removed; 19 full-texts were reviewed and an additional 12 papers met the inclusion criteria reflecting the increasing interest in MDT-care in primary care reforms. Data extracted from the 39 papers in scope included the characteristics of MDT care reported, the outcomes observed, and the enablers and barriers to implementation. A socio-ecological model was used to examine the system, organisational, professional and patient level factors that enabled MDT-care in general practice. Findings: Data showed the models of MDT-care varied substantially. They ranged from multiple providers working together to care for a patient, to interprofessional teams providing patients the option to see an alternative provider. Analysis showed mixed outcomes from MDTs in primary care, driven by contextual, policy, organisational, professional and patient factors. In some cases, MDT strengthened the management of chronic disease. In other cases, MDT reduced continuity of care by fragmenting relational continuity. MDT care also impacted access to care, comprehensiveness of care, and coordination of care-in some cases positively, and other cases negatively. Interpretation: While there may be common preconditions at the systems, organisational, professional and patient level, effective MDT-care was likely to be goal and context specific. The introduction of MDTs will require careful planning and implementation to ensure that the potential benefits of MDT are realised and that it does not compromise the quality of primary care. Funding: The International Centre for Future Health Systems is supported by funding from The Ian Potter Foundation.
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.