The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions is the official document that describes in detail the process of preparing and maintaining Cochrane systematic reviews on the effects of healthcare interventions.

/pdf/cochrane-handbook-for-systematic-reviews-of-interventions-1xbdy6uvru.pdf

Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(08)61690-6.pdf

Closing the gap in a generation: health equity through action on the social determinants of health

Preamble and Transition to ACC/AHA Guidelines to Reduce Cardiovascular Risk S2

The goals of the …

/pdf/2013-acc-aha-guideline-on-the-treatment-of-blood-cholesterol-pvngcav7fq.pdf

2013 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Treatment of Blood Cholesterol to Reduce Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Risk in Adults A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.2307%2F3343168.pdf

Development as Freedom

Objective. —To identify and quantify the major external (nongenetic) factors that contribute to death in the United States. Data Sources. —Articles published between 1977 and 1993 were identified through MEDLINE searches, reference citations, and expert consultation. Government reports and compilations of vital statistics and surveillance data were also obtained. Study Selection. —Sources selected were those that were often cited and those that indicated a quantitative assessment of the relative contributions of various factors to mortality and morbidity. Data Extraction. —Data used were those for which specific methodological assumptions were stated. A table quantifying the contributions of leading factors was constructed using actual counts, generally accepted estimates, and calculated estimates that were developed by summing various individual estimates and correcting to avoid double counting. For the factors of greatest complexity and uncertainty (diet and activity patterns and toxic agents), a conservative approach was taken by choosing the lower boundaries of the various estimates. Data Synthesis. —The most prominent contributors to mortality in the United States in 1990 were tobacco (an estimated 400000 deaths), diet and activity patterns (300 000), alcohol (100 000), microbial agents (90 000), toxic agents (60 000), firearms (35 000), sexual behavior (30 000), motor vehicles (25 000), and illicit use of drugs (20 000). Socioeconomic status and access to medical care are also important contributors, but difficult to quantify independent of the other factors cited. Because the studies reviewed used different approaches to derive estimates, the stated numbers should be viewed as first approximations. Conclusions. —Approximately half of all deaths that occurred in 1990 could be attributed to the factors identified. Although no attempt was made to further quantify the impact of these factors on morbidity and quality of life, the public health burden they impose is considerable and offers guidance for shaping health policy priorities. (JAMA. 1993;270:2207-2212)

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/JAMA/articlepdf/409171/jama_270_18_038.pdf

Actual causes of death in the United States.

Evidence of the health-promoting influence of primary care has been accumulating ever since researchers have been able to distinguish primary care from other aspects of the health services delivery system. This evidence shows that primary care helps prevent illness and death, regardless of whether the care is characterized by supply of primary care physicians, a relationship with a source of primary care, or the receipt of important features of primary care. The evidence also shows that primary care (in contrast to specialty care) is associated with a more equitable distribution of health in populations, a finding that holds in both cross-national and within-national studies. The means by which primary care improves health have been identified, thus suggesting ways to improve overall health and reduce differences in health across major population subgroups.

https://www.jhsph.edu/sebin/k/a/2005_MQ_Starfield.pdf

Contribution of Primary Care to Health Systems and Health

Methods: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted on a nationally random sample of 1217103 Medicare feefor-service beneficiaries aged 65 and older living in the United States and enrolled in both Medicare Part A and Medicare Part B during 1999. Multiple logistic regression was used to analyze the influence of age, sex, and number of types of chronic conditions on the risk of incurring inpatient hospitalizations for ambulatory care sensitive conditions and hospitalizations with preventable complications among aged Medicare beneficiaries. Results: In 1999, 82% of aged Medicare beneficiaries had 1 or more chronic conditions, and 65% had multiple chronic conditions. Inpatient admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions and hospitalizations with preventable complications increased with the number of chronic conditions. For example, Medicare beneficiaries with 4 or more chronic conditions were 99 times more likely than a beneficiary without any chronic conditions to have an admission for an ambulatory care sensitive condition (95% confidence interval, 86-113). Per capita Medicare expenditures increased with the number of types of chronic conditions from $211 among beneficiaries without a chronic condition to $13973 among beneficiaries with 4 or more types of chronic conditions. Conclusions: The risk of an avoidable inpatient admission or a preventable complication in an inpatient setting increases dramatically with the number of chronic conditions. Better primary care, especially coordination of care, could reduce avoidable hospitalization rates, especially for individuals with multiple chronic conditions.

/pdf/prevalence-expenditures-and-complications-of-multiple-4mi1gwp4mw.pdf

Prevalence, expenditures, and complications of multiple chronic conditions in the elderly

The concept—and reality—of continuity of care crosses disciplinary and organisational boundaries. The common definitions provided here should help healthcare providers evaluate continuity more rigorously and improve communication 

Patients are increasingly seen by an array of providers in a wide variety of organisations and places, raising concerns about fragmentation of care. Policy reports and charters worldwide urge a concerted effort to enhance continuity,1–3 but efforts to describe the problem or formulate solutions are complicated by the lack of consensus on the definition of continuity. To add to the confusion, other terms such as continuum of care, coordination of care, discharge planning, case management, integration of services, and seamless care are often used synonymously. This synthesis was commissioned by three Canadian health services policy and research bodies. The aim was to develop a common understanding of the concept of continuity as a basis for valid and reliable measurement of practice in different settings.

We searched academic and policy literature for documents in which the principal focus was continuity of patient care or continuity. We searched electronic databases (Medline, HealthSTAR, Embase, CINAHL, Current Contents, PsychINFO, AIDSLINE, CancerLit, Cochrane Library, Dissertation abstracts, Papers1st (conferences and paper abstracts), Web of Science, WorldCat) as well as web library catalogues, peer reviewed internet sites, internet search engines, and several in-house databases. The search included documents dated from 1966 to November 2001 written in English, French, or Spanish. The reviewers (RJR, JLH, RMcK) used a data abstraction form to summarise relevant documents from every health discipline, and all reviewers read key documents.

We presented the results of an initial review of 314 documents to participants of a workshop on continuity held in Vancouver in June 2001. We obtained structured feedback to a discussion paper, problem based scenarios, and expert presentations. Participants validated the common themes …

/pdf/continuity-of-care-a-multidisciplinary-review-py5ch26lse.pdf

Continuity of care: a multidisciplinary review

Comorbidity is associated with worse health outcomes, more complex clinical management, and increased health care costs. There is no agreement, however, on the meaning of the term, and related constructs, such as multimorbidity, morbidity burden, and patient complexity, are not well conceptualized. In this article, we review definitions of comorbidity and their relationship to related constructs. We show that the value of a given construct lies in its ability to explain a particular phenomenon of interest within the domains of (1) clinical care, (2) epidemiology, or (3) health services planning and financing. Mechanisms that may underlie the coexistence of 2 or more conditions in a patient (direct causation, associated risk factors, heterogeneity, independence) are examined, and the implications for clinical care considered. We conclude that the more precise use of constructs, as proposed in this article, would lead to improved research into the phenomenon of ill health in clinical care, epidemiology, and health services.

https://www.annfammed.org/content/annalsfm/7/4/357.full.pdf

Barbara Starfield

Papers

Contribution of Primary Care to Health Systems and Health

Prevalence, expenditures, and complications of multiple chronic conditions in the elderly

Continuity of care: a multidisciplinary review

Defining Comorbidity: Implications for Understanding Health and Health Services

Atenção primária: equilíbrio entre necessidades de saúde, serviços e tecnologia