Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28320415›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2017

The development of integrated diabetes care in the Netherlands: a multiplayer self-assessment analysis.

Nick Zonneveld, Lidewij E Vat, Hans Vlek, Mirella M N Minkman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Values of Integrated Care: A Systematic Review.International journal of integrated care · 2018
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Nick ZonneveldVilans, National Center of Excellence in Long-term Care, Catharijnesingel 47, PO Box 8228, 3503 RE, Utrecht, The Netherlands. n.zonneveld@vilans.nl.
Lidewij E VatMemorial University Newfoundland, St. John's, Canada.
Hans VlekVilans, National Center of Excellence in Long-term Care, Catharijnesingel 47, PO Box 8228, 3503 RE, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Mirella M N MinkmanVilans, National Center of Excellence in Long-term Care, Catharijnesingel 47, PO Box 8228, 3503 RE, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSince recent years Dutch diabetes care has increasingly focused on improving the quality of care by introducing the concept of care groups (in Dutch: 'zorggroepen'), care pathways and improving cooperation with involved care professionals and patients. This study examined how participating actors in care groups assess the development of their diabetes services and the differences and similarities between different stakeholder groups.

methodsA self-evaluation study was performed within 36 diabetes care groups in the Netherlands. A web-based self-assessment instrument, based on the Development Model for Integrated Care (DMIC), was used to collect data among stakeholders of each care group. The DMIC defines nine clusters of integrated care and four phases of development. Statistical analysis was used to analyze the data.

resultsRespondents indicated that the diabetes care groups work together in well-organized multidisciplinary teams and there is clarity about one another's expertise, roles and tasks. The care groups can still develop on elements related to the management and monitoring of performance, quality of care and patient-centeredness. The results show differences (p < 0.01) between three stakeholders groups in how they assess their integrated care services; (1) core players, (2) managers/directors/coordinators and (3) players at a distance. Managers, directors and coordinators assessed more implemented integrated care activities than the other two stakeholder groups. This stakeholder group also placed their care groups in a further phase of development. Players at a distance assessed significantly less present elements and assessed their care group as less developed.

conclusionsThe results show a significant difference between stakeholder groups in the assessment of diabetes care practices. This reflects that the professional disciplines and the roles of stakeholders influence the way they asses the development of their integrated care setting, or that certain stakeholder groups could be less involved or informed.

Indexed as

Diagnostic Self EvaluationAnalysis of VarianceDelivery of Health Care, IntegratedDiabetes MellitusHumansNetherlandsQuality of Health CareSelf-AssessmentSurveys and QuestionnairesCare groupsCare networksDevelopmentDiabetesIntegrated careQuality managementStakeholder groups

Identifiers

PMID28320415
PMCPMC5359897

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.