Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41938948›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in public health2026

Comprehensive geriatric assessment and management in primary care: a systematic literature review with a descriptive mapping of team composition and assessment instruments.

Francesca Fulceri, Angela Caruso, Martina Micai, Maria Vittoria Notari, Camilla Cocchi, Ambrogio Cerri, Graziano Onder, Maria Luisa Scattoni

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Francesca FulceriCoordination and Promotion of Research, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy.
Angela CarusoCoordination and Promotion of Research, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy.
Martina MicaiCoordination and Promotion of Research, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy.
Maria Vittoria NotariUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Camilla CocchiUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Ambrogio CerriDepartment of Biomedicine and Prevention, Doctoral School of Nursing Sciences and Public Health, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy.
Graziano OnderUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Maria Luisa ScattoniCoordination and Promotion of Research, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment and Management (CGAM) is a multidimensional, interdisciplinary diagnostic process to create a coordinated care plan for vulnerable older adults by addressing their medical, psychological, and functional needs. This systematic review examines randomized trials comparing CGAM with standard care or alternative interventions for older individuals in primary care focusing on how CGAM is operationalized through professional team composition and assessment instruments rather than on effectiveness outcomes alone. Methods: A search across databases identified 3,112 studies, leading to 31 studies being included in the literature review. Eligible studies generally included participants aged 65 years and older. Across all included studies the mean age of participants was above 70 years. Results: The findings show a considerable variation in team composition and assessment instruments. While this heterogeneity reflects contextual adaptability, it also highlights the lack of shared standards for CGAM implementation in primary care. Most teams consisted of three to five members. The most frequently involved professionals were nurses/licensed practical nurses ( Discussion: The variability in team composition and assessment instruments highlights the adaptability of CGAM across healthcare settings, emphasizing the need to balance standardization with the flexibility required to meet users' needs and available resources. Based on the available evidence, future CGAM research and practice should prioritize the definition of core team components, the harmonization of assessment domains and instruments, and the development of implementation-ready models that balance standardization with local flexibility.

Indexed as

Geriatric AssessmentPatient Care TeamPrimary Health CareAgedAged, 80 and overHumanscare plancomprehensive geriatric assessmentfrailtyolder peoplesystematic review

Identifiers

PMID41938948
PMCPMC13047180

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.