Evidence mapPaperPMID 42336783Full record

ArticleBMJ open2026

Evaluating the structure and process of effective integrated care for people with multiple long-term conditions: systematic review protocol.

Olamide Todowede, Sarah Damery, Naila Dracup, Jeremiah Donoghue, Furqan Butt, Amy Grove, Arabella Scantlebury

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 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

7 authors.

Olamide TodowedeCentre for Evidence and Implementation Science, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK O.Todowede@bham.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5785-1426
Sarah DameryCentre for Evidence and Implementation Science, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3681-8608
Naila DracupCentre for Evidence and Implementation Science, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Jeremiah DonoghueCentre for Evidence and Implementation Science, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Furqan ButtCentre for Evidence and Implementation Science, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Amy GroveCentre for Evidence and Implementation Science, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Arabella ScantleburyCentre for Evidence and Implementation Science, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIntegrated care represents a transformative approach to delivering person-centred healthcare, aiming to reduce health inequalities, improve outcomes and boost system efficiency. The WHO advocates integrated care, which is also a central pillar of the UK government's National Health Service (NHS) 10-year plan. However, there remains a significant evidence gap regarding optimal organisational strategies for designing and delivering integrated care services. Multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs) refer to the coexistence of two or more chronic physical and/or mental health conditions in a person. This complex need requires coordinated support from multiple healthcare services, and individuals with MLTCs may particularly benefit from integrated care services. This review aims to identify and synthesise evidence regarding the organisational structures (care set-up) and processes (care delivery) that support integrated care models for adults with MLTCs.

methodsAn information specialist and research team will co-develop a search strategy and search databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO) for empirical articles between January 1990 and December 2025. Date restrictions reflect the establishment of integrated care as a concept for organising and delivering health services. Screening, data extraction and methodological assessment using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool will be independently conducted by two researchers. Eligible studies include any empirical studies, including all study designs that investigate adults (aged 18+ years) with MLTCs in high-income countries. This review aims to identify the way integrated care services are designed and delivered. As such, studies must identify and explain the organisational structures and processes involved in implementing and delivering integrated care services to be eligible for inclusion. Extracted data will be categorised according to the two integrated care mechanisms: vertical and horizontal integration. Data will then be examined in relation to how these mechanisms function and/or interact across the macro (system-wide structures and policies), meso (organisational arrangements) and micro (clinical practice and patient-level interactions) levels of integrated care. Review findings will be reported narratively. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required. This work may directly inform health policy by providing evidence-based understanding of how to organise and deliver integrated care for people living with MLTCs. The findings will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and shared with relevant stakeholders. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD420251143298.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health Care, IntegratedMultiple Chronic ConditionsHumansPatient-Centered CareResearch DesignState MedicineSystematic Reviews as TopicUnited KingdomChronic DiseaseDelivery of Health Care, IntegratedMultimorbidity

Identifiers

PMID42336783
PMCPMC13295912

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.