ArticleFamily medicine and community health2026
Pilot of a novel patient-led intervention for postdischarge from hospital management of older patients' care in general practice.
Article in Family medicine and community health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveGeneral Practice Management After Transition Events (GP-MATE) is a codesigned patient-held tool to structure a dedicated postdischarge appointment for older patients. This pilot in routine general practice evaluated its feasibility (recruitment, tool use), acceptability (staff/patient views), potential outcomes (error, harm and readmission) and healthcare cost implications. DESIGN AND
settingSeven diverse general practices in the West Midlands, England, participated in this 4-year mixed-methods National Institute for Health and Care Research-funded study. A 20-minute GP-MATE appointment was offered to all patients aged >65 recently discharged from the hospital, supported by a paper-based communication tool sent to those who accepted. Three months of free-text electronic health records were reviewed for care use, intervention coverage, error, harm and readmission. Attributable healthcare costs were assessed. Patient/carer surveys and interviews with patients, carers and healthcare professionals explored experiences of delivery and use.
participants40 patients (mean age 75 years; 53% female) attended GP-MATE appointments, and 29 returned surveys. 17 patient-held GP-MATE forms were retrieved and analysed. Seven patients/carers and nine healthcare professionals were interviewed.
resultsCare appeared safe, with tentative signs of being two-thirds less error prone (
conclusionGP-MATE was feasible to deliver, acceptable to staff and patients/carers and supported postdischarge communication. Larger trials are needed to establish robust evidence of readmission reduction and error/harm reduction, equity and cost-benefit.
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.