Question · asked by 1 review
Summary of findings: Any alternative model of care vs usual care: Resource use: cost‐effectiveness evaluations (6 to 21 months)
- Population
- Nursing home residents (mean age 78.3 to 86.0 years; more than 66% women; 62.1% to 87.3% with dental prostheses)
- Intervention
- Summary of findings: Any alternative model of care
- Comparison
- usual care
- Outcome
- Resource use: cost‐effectiveness evaluations (6 to 21 months)
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Summary of findings: Any alternative model of care vs usual care Resource use: cost‐effectiveness evaluations (6 to 21 months) · residents of aged care facilities Models for delivery and co‐ordination of primary or secondary health care (or both) to older adults living… (2024) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 2341 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Models for delivery and co‐ordination of primary or secondary health care (or both) to older adults living in aged care facilities 2024 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | Not extracted | Not assessed |
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.