ReviewFrontiers in health services2026
Humanization interventions in primary health care: an umbrella review.
Review in Frontiers in health services, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This umbrella review identified systematic and non-systematic reviews of quantitative and qualitative empirical studies on interventions aimed at promoting humanization in Primary Health Care (PHC). The objective of this umbrella review was to synthesize and compare the available evidence on interventions aimed at promoting humanization in PHC. It addressed two questions: (1) What are the main definitions and dimensions of humanization in healthcare identified in the existing body of research? and (2) Which interventions promote humanization in PHC, and what outcomes have they demonstrated? Methods: The reviews were selected following PRISMA guidelines and eligibility criteria based on the PICOS strategy (population, interventions, comparators, outcomes, and study design). Records were identified in Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, and PubMed. Results: Twenty-five systematic and non-systematic reviews were included. The evidence shows consistent convergence in defining humanization in PHC as person-centered and relational care grounded in open communication, empathy, respect, and patient participation in decision-making. The most frequently studied interventions include person-centered communication styles, shared decision-making, reorganization of care processes (e.g., welcoming practices, continuity, and coordination), and organizational strategies targeting access and equity. These interventions are robustly associated with improvements in experiential outcomes, such as satisfaction, trust, participation, reduced decisional conflict, and strengthened therapeutic relationships, while effects on final clinical outcomes are more variable and context-dependent. Community-based, intercultural, and digital interventions were also identified, extending humanization toward social determinants, continuity of care, and reduced access barriers. Discussion: Findings showed that humanization in PHC aligns with classic Person-Centered Care frameworks, where patients' values, preferences, and life contexts guide clinical decisions. Relational micro-practices emerge as central quality mechanisms, yet their impact depends on enabling organizational conditions, including time, continuity, coordination, and institutional support. Overall, humanization appears as a system-level property rather than an isolated technique, requiring integrated, context-sensitive, and equity-oriented interventions to achieve sustained and meaningful 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.