Community health services in European literature: A systematic review of their features, outcomes, and nursing contribution to care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To meet the population's needs, community care should be customized and continuous, adequately equipped, and monitored. INTRODUCTION: Considering their fragmented and heterogeneous nature, a summary of community healthcare services described in European literature is needed. The aim of this study was to summarize their organizational models, outcomes, nursing contribution to care, and nursing-related determinants of outcomes. METHODS: A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and Embase in October 2022 and October 2023 (for updated results). Quantitative studies investigating the effects of community care, including nursing contribution, on patient outcomes were included and summarized. Reporting followed the PRISMA checklist. The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022383856). RESULTS: Twenty-three studies describing six types of community care services were included, which are heterogeneous in terms of target population, country, interventions, organizational characteristics, and investigated outcomes. Heterogeneous services' effects were observed for access to emergency services, satisfaction, and compliance with treatment. Services revealed a potential to reduce rehospitalizations of people with long-term conditions, frail or older persons, children, and heart failure patients. Models are mainly multidisciplinary and, although staffing and workload may also have an impact on provided care, this was not enough investigated. DISCUSSION: Community health services described in European literature in the last decade are in line with population needs and suggest different suitable models and settings according to different care needs. Community care should be strengthened in health systems, although the influence of staffing, workload, and work environment on nursing care should be investigated by developing new management models. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICY: Community care models are heterogeneous across Europe, and the optimum organizational structure is not clear yet. Future policies should consider the impact of community care on both health and economic outcomes and enhance nursing contributions to care.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".