ArticleJMIR research protocols2026
Home Visits as a Primary Health Care Strategy During COVID-19: Protocol for a Scoping Review.
Article in JMIR research protocols, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Home Visits as a Primary Health Care Strategy During COVID-19: Protocol for a Scoping Review.JMIR research protocols · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Primary health care played a critical role during the COVID-19 pandemic by adapting care delivery to maintain essential services and reduce transmission risks. Home visits were used to monitor individuals in isolation, support vulnerable populations at increased risk, and sustain community-based care. However, their organization and operationalization varied across settings, and the available evidence remains fragmented. Objective: This protocol outlines the methods for a scoping review that will systematically map how in-person or hybrid home visits linked to primary, community-based, or first-contact care were organized and operationalized during the COVID-19 response, including the operational approaches, reported outcomes, and remaining knowledge gaps. Methods: This protocol follows the Joanna Briggs Institute methodological framework and will be reported in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) statement. Eligibility was defined using the Population, Concept, and Context framework. Searches will be conducted in seven electronic databases (Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and LILACS) without language restrictions and will include eligible studies published from 2020 onward. Conditional supplementary procedures may include backward citation searching and citation mapping of included studies and relevant reviews, as well as targeted searches and limited gray literature searching, if database searches yield limited evidence or leave relevant questions insufficiently represented. Records will be managed in Rayyan. Two reviewers will independently assess eligibility, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. All included sources will undergo descriptive mapping. Operational configurations will be classified by provider configuration, delivery modality, and targeting logic. Basic qualitative content analysis will be limited to explicitly reported implementation experiences, barriers, facilitators, contextual adaptations, and recommendations. Results: Pilot searches were conducted solely to assess feasibility and refine the search strategy; formal searching, screening, data extraction, and synthesis have not yet begun. The review will commence after acceptance of the protocol and is expected to be completed within approximately 6 months. Conclusions: The review will provide a structured evidence map of home-visit practices during the COVID-19 response and may identify transferable operational lessons and evidence gaps relevant to preparedness for future public health emergencies. Reported outcomes will not be interpreted as evidence of comparative effectiveness or causal effects.
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.