Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8142796›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)1994

Listening to local voices: adapting rapid appraisal to assess health and social needs in general practice.

S A Murray, J Tapson, L Turnbull, J McCallum, A Little

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 1994. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The perceptions of general practice among Central and Eastern Europeans in the United Kingdom: A systematic scoping review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Thirty years on from Alma-Ata: Where have we come from? Where are we going?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2008
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

S A MurrayUniversity of Edinburgh.
J Tapson
L Turnbull
J McCallum
A Little

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo explore the use of rapid appraisal in defining the health and social needs of a community and to formulate joint action plans between the residents and service providers.

designCollection of data by an extended primary care team from three sources: existing documents about the neighbourhood, interviews with a range of informants, and direct observations to build a profile of the community.

settingCouncil estate of 670 homes in Edinburgh.

main outcome measuresPerceived problems of the community and suggestions for change.

resultsThe interviews and focus groups identified six priorities for change, many of which were not health related. These changes have been or are being implemented.

conclusionsAn expanded primary care team can use rapid appraisal as a first step in identifying and meeting local health needs. It facilitates a multidisciplinary approach and complements quantitative methods of assessing need.

Indexed as

Health Services Needs and DemandCommunity ParticipationFamily PracticeFemaleHealth PrioritiesHealth StatusHumansMaleRegional Health PlanningScotland

Identifiers

PMID8142796
PMCPMC2539376

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.