Full Article

McMasterLogo_New-2017-300x165
Back
Policymaker (health systems) article

Home-based primary care interventions. Comparative effectiveness review no. 164

Findings
Recency, quality and context of the findings
  • Last year literature searched
    2015
  • Year Published
    2016
  • Quality Rating
    7/10 (AMSTAR rating from McMaster Health Forum)
  • Countries in which studies (included in the synthesis) were conducted
    USA (11); Denmark (3); Not reported (3); Canada (1)
  • Global/regional focus
    Not yet available
  • Country focus
    USA (11); Denmark (3); Not reported (3); Canada (1)
  • Low - and middle-income country (LMIC) focus
s
Additional details about the research
  • Type of document
    Systematic review of effects
  • Type of question
    Effectiveness
  • Focus
    Specific
  • Target
    Individual
    Health system
  • Priority Area
    Not applicable
  • Health system topic(s)
    Delivery arrangements
    How care is designed to meet consumers' needs
    Case management
    By whom care is provided
    Skill mix - Multidisciplinary teams
    Staff - Training
    Staff - Support
    Where care is provided
    Site of service delivery
    Implementation strategies
    Consumer-targeted strategy
    Information or education provision
    Provider-targeted strategy
    Educational material
  • Theme
    Optimal aging
  • Domain
    Sectors
    Primary care
    Home care
    Providers
    Physicians
    Nurse
    Pharmacist
    Allied health professional
Publication details
  • Citation
    Totten AM, White-Chu EF, Wasson N, Morgan E, Kansagara D, Davis-O'Reilly C, et al. Home-based primary care interventions. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 164. AHRQ Comparative Effectiveness Reviews. 2016:1-103.
  • DOI
    Not yet available

Register for free access to all Professional content

Register