SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2017
Shared care across the interface between primary and specialty care in management of long term conditions.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
54 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effectiveness of Continuity of Care Interventions Linking Hospital Care to Primary Healthcare for Patients With Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cancer medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Community care navigation intervention for people who are at risk of unplanned hospital presentations.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Systematic literature review of pharmacists in general practice in supporting the implementation of shared care agreements in primary care.Systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Nudge strategies to improve healthcare providers' implementation of evidence-based guidelines, policies and practices: a systematic review of trials included within Cochrane systematic reviews.Implementation science : IS · 2020Pooled it
- Involving the general practitioner during curative cancer treatment: a systematic review of health care interventions.BMJ open · 2019Pooled it
- Developing a new clinical governance framework for chronic diseases in primary care: an umbrella review.BMJ open · 2018Pooled it
- Interventions to change the behaviour of health professionals and the organisation of care to promote weight reduction in children and adults with overweight or obesity.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Person-centred, integrated and pro-active care for multi-morbid elderly with advanced care needs: a propensity score-matched controlled trial.BMC health services research · 2019Trial
- Clinical outcomes of an integrated primary-secondary model of care for individuals with complex type 2 diabetes: a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial.Diabetologia · 2019Trial
- Reimagining the family physician-specialist relationship amid the primary care crisis: Harnessing power for better collaboration.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2026Article
- Building bridges in migraine management: consensus pathways on best practices across primary and specialist care in Italy.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Article
- Collaboration between general practitioners and psychiatrists via digital platforms in the Netherlands: advantages and specific limiting factors.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- What are the primary care physicians and cardiologists talking about? a cross-sectional analysis of two telemedicine services in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Uncovering Four Types of Care Coordination in Primary Care.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM · 2025Observational
- Development of a Novel Shared Care Intervention to Address Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Rural West Virginia.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2025Article
- Systematic Evaluation of How Indicators of Inequity and Disadvantage Are Measured and Reported in Population Health Evidence Syntheses.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Review
- Article
- Expanding the role of community hospitals to promote population health in Singapore.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2025Review
- A Qualitative Investigation of Characteristics Impacting Clinical Decision-Making in Integrated Behavioral Health Care.The journal of behavioral health services & research · 2024Article
- eHealth Platforms Facilitate Prostate Cancer Shared Care: A Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundShared care has been used in the management of many chronic conditions with the assumption that it delivers better care than primary or specialty care alone; however, little is known about the effectiveness of shared care.
objectivesTo determine the effectiveness of shared care health service interventions designed to improve the management of chronic disease across the primary/specialty care interface. This is an update of a previously published review.Secondary questions include the following:1. Which shared care interventions or portions of shared care interventions are most effective?2. What do the most effective systems have in common? SEARCH
methodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library to 12 October 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: One review author performed the initial abstract screen; then two review authors independently screened and selected studies for inclusion. We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised controlled trials (NRCTs), controlled before-after studies (CBAs) and interrupted time series analyses (ITS) evaluating the effectiveness of shared care interventions for people with chronic conditions in primary care and community settings. The intervention was compared with usual care in that setting. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data from the included studies, evaluated study quality and judged the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We conducted a meta-analysis of results when possible and carried out a narrative synthesis of the remainder of the results. We presented the results in a 'Summary of findings' table, using a tabular format to show effect sizes for all outcome types. MAIN
resultsWe identified 42 studies of shared care interventions for chronic disease management (N = 18,859), 39 of which were RCTs, two CBAs and one an NRCT. Of these 42 studies, 41 examined complex multi-faceted interventions and lasted from six to 24 months. Overall, our confidence in results regarding the effectiveness of interventions ranged from moderate to high certainty. Results showed probably few or no differences in clinical outcomes overall with a tendency towards improved blood pressure management in the small number of studies on shared care for hypertension, chronic kidney disease and stroke (mean difference (MD) 3.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.68 to 5.25)(based on moderate-certainty evidence). Mental health outcomes improved, particularly in response to depression treatment (risk ratio (RR) 1.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.22 to 1.62; six studies, N = 1708) and recovery from depression (RR 2.59, 95% CI 1.57 to 4.26; 10 studies, N = 4482) in studies examining the 'stepped care' design of shared care interventions (based on high-certainty evidence). Investigators noted modest effects on mean depression scores (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.29, 95% CI -0.37 to -0.20; six studies, N = 3250). Differences in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), processes of care and participation and default rates in shared care services were probably limited (based on moderate-certainty evidence). Studies probably showed little or no difference in hospital admissions, service utilisation and patient health behaviours (with evidence of moderate certainty). AUTHORS'
conclusionsThis review suggests that shared care improves depression outcomes and probably has mixed or limited effects on other outcomes. Methodological shortcomings, particularly inadequate length of follow-up, may account in part for these limited effects. Review findings support the growing evidence base for shared care in the management of depression, particularly stepped care models of shared care. Shared care interventions for other conditions should be developed within research settings, with account taken of the complexity of such interventions and awareness of the need to carry out longer studies to test effectiveness and sustainability over time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.