ArticleBMC health services research2026
Team-based care in small primary care practices: a scoping review.
Article in BMC health services research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrimary care practices experience challenges to implementing team-based care, and these challenges may be more pronounced in small-to-medium-sized independent primary care practices (SIPs). Our objective is to provide a review of the literature on team-based care implemented within SIPs.
methodsThe literature was identified using keywords related to primary care and team-based care in PubMed/MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE. Studies on team-based care within small-primary care settings were extracted and organized according to the four domains of the Integrated (Health Care) Team Effectiveness Model (ITEM) framework.
resultsTwenty-five studies met our criteria for inclusion and were included in our review. Of those, only nine of the included studies solely focused on SIPs. Studies addressed some component of task design, including the composition of the team (i.e. MA and MD dyads) and the features of the task (i.e. role interdependence). Studies also discussed team processes, such as communication and coordination. Few studies discussed psychosocial traits during implementation, including trust and psychological safety. Lastly, studies described the organizational context of the practices, which includes their structure, resources or training environment. Identified barriers for team-based care implementation included financial constraints when hiring additional staff and issues with the current payment models that reward team-based care.
conclusionsStudies solely focused on small primary care practices are limited. Of the four key domains, the biggest gap was identified around psychosocial traits and how mutual trust is fostered. Areas of future research include attention to how trust is built as practices implement team-based care and shift their mental model.
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.