Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Annals of Family Medicine
  • My alerts
Annals of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Follow annalsfm on Twitter
  • Visit annalsfm on Facebook
Review ArticleSystematic Reviews

Interpersonal Continuity of Care and Care Outcomes: A Critical Review

John W. Saultz and Jennifer Lochner
The Annals of Family Medicine March 2005, 3 (2) 159-166; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.285
John W. Saultz
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jennifer Lochner
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Published eLetters

If you would like to comment on this article, click on Submit a Response to This article, below. We welcome your input.

Submit a Response to This Article
Compose eLetter

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

Vertical Tabs

Jump to comment:

  • Still not quite there with definition? - but the challenge is to measure 'interpersonal' and show it makes a difference
    George K Freeman
    Published on: 21 April 2005
  • Can a village care for a patient?
    Elizabeth A. Bayliss
    Published on: 13 April 2005
  • Re-framing Continuity
    Larry A Green
    Published on: 09 April 2005
  • the need for better evidence
    Richard Baker
    Published on: 05 April 2005
  • The Importance of Continuity of Care: Are we asking the wrong questions?
    David G. Litaker
    Published on: 30 March 2005
  • Published on: (21 April 2005)
    Page navigation anchor for Still not quite there with definition? - but the challenge is to measure 'interpersonal' and show it makes a difference
    Still not quite there with definition? - but the challenge is to measure 'interpersonal' and show it makes a difference
    • George K Freeman, London, England
    I enjoyed Saultz's further contribution, with Lochner, to our understanding of outcomes associated with (inter)personal continuity of care. It is good to have an up to date assembly of the evidence. Correspondence so far has been instructive about where next. Baker has called for RCTs, Green reminds us about the modern context of care and Bayliss specifically wants more recognition that modern care tends to be given by groups...
    Show More
    I enjoyed Saultz's further contribution, with Lochner, to our understanding of outcomes associated with (inter)personal continuity of care. It is good to have an up to date assembly of the evidence. Correspondence so far has been instructive about where next. Baker has called for RCTs, Green reminds us about the modern context of care and Bayliss specifically wants more recognition that modern care tends to be given by groups or teams. This is a big research agenda which will be challenging to fund. We need to be very clear about the research questions. While Saultz and Lochner's review is the most comprehensive of its kind so far published, it was conceived and designed before the publication of Haggerty et al's differently framed review1 which emphasised that continuity is something experienced by patients and which identified three key elements - relational, managerial and informational. It is tempting, but wrong, to equate Saultz and Lochner's 'interpersonal' with Haggerty et al's 'relational'. This is because many of the studies cited by Saultz and Lochner were not able to measure the patient's experience of interpersonal continuity. In other words the interpersonal relationship stressed by Larry Green in his wise comment was not usually assessed. Instead, most studies of interpersonal continuity actually measured the number of contacts with the same physician, while being unable to comment on the quality of those contacts and whether they were part of a therapeutic relationship. I heartily agree with my colleague Richard Baker about the desirability of randomized trials, where the intervention is intended to improve true interpersonal - i.e. relational continuity, where the patients' experiences of this are assessed and where outcomes of interest to policy makers such as improved well being and reduced costs are sought. And I agree with Elizabeth Bayliss that a good team may deliver good relational continuity - but again the patient's actual experience has to be the gold standard. A positive outcome from such a trial is needed to convince David Litaker. He speaks for many who wonder whether continuity of care (by which most actually mean interpersonal/relational continuity) may be more of a shibboleth than an essential attribute of General Practice & Family Medicine. 1 Haggerty JL, Reid RJ, Freeman GK, Starfield B, Adair CE, McKendry R. Continuity of Care: a multidisciplinary review. Br Med J 2003;327:1219-1221.

    Competing interests:   None declared

    Show Less
    Competing Interests: None declared.
  • Published on: (13 April 2005)
    Page navigation anchor for Can a village care for a patient?
    Can a village care for a patient?
    • Elizabeth A. Bayliss, Denver, CO

    After reading Drs. Saultz and Lochner’s review [1], believers will need no convincing and skeptics should be (at least partially) persuaded that continuity of care is associated with improvement in certain clinical outcomes and possibly decreased costs of care.

    As the authors readily acknowledge, it is difficult to define continuity. It is not just about the duration of the doctor-patient relationship, but abo...

    Show More

    After reading Drs. Saultz and Lochner’s review [1], believers will need no convincing and skeptics should be (at least partially) persuaded that continuity of care is associated with improvement in certain clinical outcomes and possibly decreased costs of care.

    As the authors readily acknowledge, it is difficult to define continuity. It is not just about the duration of the doctor-patient relationship, but about the depth and content of the mutual knowledge gained during that time. One component may be the ability for a provider (or a provider’s team members) to care for a patient within the patient’s biopsychosocial context. Another may be the patient’s perception of having one’s needs met in a predictable pattern. In the best cases, this can promote collaborative and appropriate decision making and perhaps improved outcomes such as the decreased hospitalization rates noted in this review.

    One of the authors’ concerns is whether future health care will be based on the individual doctor-patient relationship or on a less personal ‘interdisciplinary team.’ But is a team approach less personal? If the ‘team’ is stable it may not be.[2] One could argue that it is quite possible for a patient to have a continuity relationship with more than one member of a provider’s office. (This idea was introduced years ago with the advent of shared overnight and weekend call schedules within multiple-provider practices.) It may even be possible for these relationships to be established and maintained in the context of the increasingly technologically sophisticated office environment that includes population-based tracking systems for care management and different forms of patient-provider communication. For example, communication may now be more likely to be initiated by the physician and his or her team for purposes of chronic illness care or preventive services. The technology is unlikely to go away, so if there is value in continuity of care (as is well suggested in this review), it behooves us as providers to determine how we can maintain continuity in the face of a changing office environment. This will take a commitment on the part of clinics and offices to maintain stable teams and to define and value continuity above and beyond the exclusive physician-patient relationship.

    (1) Saulz JW and Lochner J. Interpersonal continuity of care and care outcomes: A critical review. AnnFamMed 2005;3:159-66.

    (2) Campbell C and McGauley G. Doctor-patient relationships in chronic illness: insights from forensic psychiatry. BMJ 2005;330:667-670.

    Competing interests:   None declared

    Show Less
    Competing Interests: None declared.
  • Published on: (9 April 2005)
    Page navigation anchor for Re-framing Continuity
    Re-framing Continuity
    • Larry A Green, Washington, DC

    Saultz and Lochner continue their assessment of interpersonal continuity quite nicely with this piece. They partially frame their review around the Future of Family Medicine Project when they state: "A central question facing the future of family medicine is the degree to which we will provide personal health care based on the individual doctor- patient relationship, or whether we will seek to provide a medical home fo...

    Show More

    Saultz and Lochner continue their assessment of interpersonal continuity quite nicely with this piece. They partially frame their review around the Future of Family Medicine Project when they state: "A central question facing the future of family medicine is the degree to which we will provide personal health care based on the individual doctor- patient relationship, or whether we will seek to provide a medical home for patients based on an interdisciplinary team with less emphasis on personal care." Like other respondents, I want to reframe the debate.

    First, we are headed toward patient-centered care and the assurance of services for patients, and away from physician-centered care and the assurance of position or status of physicians. Second, a commitment to interpersonal care and a medical home need not be incompatible polarities. Third, currently available information technologies have changed forever how care is delivered, and they are sufficiently robust to permit integrated, if asynchronous, care. Fourth, no one practices alone anymore, and historic lip service to teamwork must give way to the real deal. And fifth, all of this means in part, that continuity of care, including an interpersonal component with one's chosen physician, is actually more possible now than ever before. (After all, the US now has in active clinical practice a primary care physician for every 1321 persons in the country). In short, there is no need to pose a medical home as an alternative to interpersonal contintuity. A medical home can be the platform on which people get their care, and within it, various members can play their part, including a physician with a personal, ongoing relationship with the patient.

    Buried in the data posted for the Future of Family Medicine Project are findings that what the people of the United States yearn for but cannot find, is not a building, not a concierge, not a nurse, and not another clinic. They yearn for a PHYSICIAN who will get to know them and STICK WITH THEM as they reap the benefits of modern medicine applied to their worries, problems and personal health care goals. But they don't think this type of physician exists anymore, and if such a physician should be fortuitously discovered, people doubt that the current ridiculous health care arrangements in the US do or would permit them to do their job as a personal physician.

    Let's add another framework for further research and work about interpersonal contintuity. Let's ask what it will take to permit people in the richest country on the planet to be able to select and stay with a physician of their choice who they trust and know, and who knows them not as a case or a CPT-4 number, but a living person, seeking to live a whole, meaningful life. Or, maybe we prefer to wait and see if the evidence supports medicine making any contributions to a whole, meaningful life.

    Competing interests:   None declared

    Show Less
    Competing Interests: None declared.
  • Published on: (5 April 2005)
    Page navigation anchor for the need for better evidence
    the need for better evidence
    • Richard Baker, Leicester, UK

    In the UK, we are building up to a national election, and the political parties are starting to lay out their policies to the electorate. Health care will be a key issue in the election. The April 2nd issue of the Times newspaper draws attention to one difference between the two political parties; the Conservative party is promising to preserve small primary care practices because they provide continuity and personal care...

    Show More

    In the UK, we are building up to a national election, and the political parties are starting to lay out their policies to the electorate. Health care will be a key issue in the election. The April 2nd issue of the Times newspaper draws attention to one difference between the two political parties; the Conservative party is promising to preserve small primary care practices because they provide continuity and personal care. Tony Blair’s Labour party, on the other hand, plans to promote the development of large primary care practices staffed by a wide range of professionals offering a mix of services – and almost certainly, therefore, less interpersonal continuity.

    It’s great that policy makers are beginning to talk about interpersonal continuity in primary care, but it would be even better if they were to base their policies on evidence. They would do well to read Saultz and Lochner’s review in the current issue of Annals as a start.1 It deals with an issue that really concerns them – cost. For primary care professionals committed to the idea of interpersonal continuity, the findings of the review will be reassuring and will reflect their experiences as providers. But will the evidence be sufficient to convince the policymakers?

    Saultz and Lochner have treated the evidence fairly, and it is encouraging that there are so many studies that fairly consistently indicate better outcomes and lower costs associated with interpersonal continuity. Policymakers, though, may be difficult to convince. It is disappointing that primary care researchers have not yet been able to provide irrefutable evidence of the benefit (or otherwise) of interpersonal continuity from large, good quality randomised trials. The importance of interpersonal continuity will remain in dispute in many countries until such evidence is available. I really hope that research funders in the UK, US and elsewhere will take note of the review’s conclusions and give priority to commissioning one or more trials.

    References

    1. Saultz JW, Lochner J. Interpersonal continuity of care and care outcomes: a critical review. Annals of Family Medicine 2005;3:159-66.

    Competing interests:   None declared

    Show Less
    Competing Interests: None declared.
  • Published on: (30 March 2005)
    Page navigation anchor for The Importance of Continuity of Care: Are we asking the wrong questions?
    The Importance of Continuity of Care: Are we asking the wrong questions?
    • David G. Litaker, Cleveland, Ohio

    Saultz and Lochner provide a useful review of data regarding the association between continuity of care, care delivery, and treatment outcomes. Although they report that results across studies have been inconsistent, they attribute much of this to methodological challenges, including differing definitions and methods of measurement, which may hamper recognition of such an association. Their call for studies definitive...

    Show More

    Saultz and Lochner provide a useful review of data regarding the association between continuity of care, care delivery, and treatment outcomes. Although they report that results across studies have been inconsistent, they attribute much of this to methodological challenges, including differing definitions and methods of measurement, which may hamper recognition of such an association. Their call for studies definitively establishing this link, however, reflects a troubling perspective that has prevailed in primary care for too long: greater continuity of care must translate into higher quality care and better outcomes. In such statements, equipoise is imperiled. Is continuity of care universally important, or only for the most vulnerable, as some have started to suggest ? Can desirable treatment outcomes be achieved in settings in which continuity of care is uncommon, and what are the features of such organizations? Perhaps health system planners have been prudent in their reluctance to accept this “core assumption”: In focusing on the inevitability of a relationship between continuity of care and outcomes, we miss an opportunity to seek answers that prove more informative in guiding the development of health care delivery services in the future.

    Competing interests:   None declared

    Show Less
    Competing Interests: None declared.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Annals of Family Medicine: 3 (2)
The Annals of Family Medicine: 3 (2)
Vol. 3, Issue 2
1 Mar 2005
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • In Brief
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Annals of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Interpersonal Continuity of Care and Care Outcomes: A Critical Review
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Annals of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Annals of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
3 + 4 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Interpersonal Continuity of Care and Care Outcomes: A Critical Review
John W. Saultz, Jennifer Lochner
The Annals of Family Medicine Mar 2005, 3 (2) 159-166; DOI: 10.1370/afm.285

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Get Permissions
Share
Interpersonal Continuity of Care and Care Outcomes: A Critical Review
John W. Saultz, Jennifer Lochner
The Annals of Family Medicine Mar 2005, 3 (2) 159-166; DOI: 10.1370/afm.285
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • INTRODUCTION
    • METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Quantifying, Understanding and Enhancing Relational Continuity of Care (QUERCC): a mixed-methods protocol
  • Are there opportunities to improve care as patients transition through the cancer care continuum? A scoping review
  • Enabling patient-physician continuity in Swedish primary care: the importance of a named GP. A registry-based observational study
  • Managing patients with eating disorders: a qualitative study in primary care
  • The Wall of Evidence for Continuity of Care: How Many More Bricks Do We Need?
  • Physician continuity of care in the last year of life in community-dwelling adults: retrospective population-based study
  • Continuity and breaches in GP care and their associations with mortality for patients with chronic disease: an observational study using Norwegian registry data
  • Physician-Level Continuity of Care and Patient Outcomes in All-Payer Claims Database
  • Continuity of care and consultation mode in general practice: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study using patient-level and practice-level data from before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in England
  • General practitioners ending their practice and impact on patients health, healthcare use and mortality: a protocol for national registry cohort studies in Norway, 2008 to 2021
  • Personal Continuity and Appropriate Prescribing in Primary Care
  • Impact of primary care usual provider type and provider interdependence on outcomes for patients with diabetes: a cohort study
  • Qualitative study evaluating the expectations and experiences of Dutch parents of children with chronic gastrointestinal symptoms visiting their general practitioner
  • The impact of remote care approaches on continuity in primary care: a mixed-studies systematic review
  • Time for Family Medicine to Stop Enabling a Dysfunctional Health Care System
  • The Impact of Interpersonal Continuity of Primary Care on Health Care Costs and Use: A Critical Review
  • Interpersonal Primary Care Continuity for Chronic Conditions Is Associated with Fewer Hospitalizations and Emergency Department Visits Among Medicaid Enrollees
  • The impact of remote care approaches on continuity in primary care: a mixed-studies systematic review
  • Interpersonal Primary Care Continuity for Chronic Conditions Is Associated with Fewer Hospitalizations and Emergency Department Visits Among Medicaid Enrollees
  • General practitioners ending their practice and impact on patients health, health care use and mortality. A protocol for national registry cohort studies in Norway, 2006 to 2021
  • Measuring the Value Functions of Primary Care: Physician-Level Continuity of Care Quality Measure
  • General practice and patient characteristics associated with personal continuity: a mixed-methods study
  • Association between resident status and patients experiences of primary care: a cross-sectional study in the Greater Bay Area, China
  • How does general practitioner discontinuity affect healthcare utilisation? An observational cohort study of 2.4 million Norwegians 2007-2017
  • Are there opportunities to improve care as patients transition through the cancer care continuum? A scoping review protocol
  • Predictors of Family Medicine Patient Retention in Opioid Medication-Assisted Treatment
  • Having a Usual Source of Care Is Associated with Longer Telomere Length in a National Sample of Older Adults
  • Assessing the Longitudinal Impact of Physician-Patient Relationship on Functional Health
  • The Built Environment for Professionalism
  • Physical Distancing With Social Connectedness
  • Evaluating quality of overall care among older adults with diabetes with comorbidities in Ontario, Canada: a retrospective cohort study
  • Admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions on rural islands and their association with patient experience: a multicentred prospective cohort study
  • Continuity of care and delivery of diabetes and hypertensive care among regular users of primary care services in Chile: a cross-sectional study
  • Powering-Up Primary Care Teams: Advanced Team Care With In-Room Support
  • Tackling multimorbidity in primary care: is relational continuity the missing ingredient?
  • Colluding With the Decline of Continuity
  • Higher Primary Care Physician Continuity is Associated With Lower Costs and Hospitalizations
  • The Long Loneliness of Primary Care
  • Practice sharing among residents in a family medicine teaching unit
  • Direct Primary Care: Applying Theory to Potential Changes in Delivery and Outcomes
  • Partage de clientele entre les residents dun site de formation en medecine de famille
  • Continuity and Access in the Era of Part-Time Practice
  • Individual utilisation thresholds and exploring how GPs knowledge of their patients affects diagnosis: a qualitative study in primary care
  • The Challenges of Measuring, Improving, and Reporting Quality in Primary Care
  • Visit Entropy Associated with Hospital Readmission Rates
  • Patients Who Choose Primary Care Physicians Based On Low Office Visit Price Can Realize Broader Savings
  • Continuity of care in primary care and association with survival in older people: a 17-year prospective cohort study
  • The Personal Doctoring Manifesto: A Perspective from the Keystone IV Conference
  • A Primary Care Panel Size of 2500 Is neither Accurate nor Reasonable
  • Ameliorer les soins primaires: La continuite est une question de relations
  • Improving primary care: Continuity is about relationships
  • Teamlets in Primary Care: Enhancing the Patient and Clinician Experience
  • A population-based study comparing patterns of care delivery on the quality of care for persons living with HIV in Ontario
  • Patient-doctor continuity and diagnosis of cancer: electronic medical records study in general practice
  • Effect of Continuity of Care on Hospital Utilization for Seniors With Multiple Medical Conditions in an Integrated Health Care System
  • Managing patients with multimorbidity in primary care
  • Validation of 2 New Measures of Continuity of Care Based on Year-to-Year Follow-up With Known Providers of Health Care
  • Impact of Continuity of Care on Mortality and Health Care Costs: A Nationwide Cohort Study in Korea
  • The Future Role of the Family Physician in the United States: A Rigorous Exercise in Definition
  • Staffing Patterns of Primary Care Practices in the Comprehensive Primary Care Initiative
  • Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities in Access to Primary Care Among People With Chronic Conditions
  • The 10 Building Blocks of High-Performing Primary Care
  • How patient-centred care is changing orthopaedics
  • An Argument for Comprehensiveness as the "Special Sauce" in a Recipe for the Patient-Centered Medical Home
  • Discontinuity of care at end of life: a qualitative exploration of OOH end of life care
  • Continuity of GP care is related to reduced specialist healthcare use: a cross-sectional survey
  • The strength of primary care systems
  • Better management of patients with multimorbidity
  • Performance of Primary Care Physicians and Other Providers on Key Process Measures in the Treatment of Diabetes
  • Prevention and management of chronic disease in Aboriginal and Islander Community Controlled Health Services in Queensland: a quality improvement study assessing change in selected clinical performance indicators over time in a cohort of services
  • A systematic review of evidence on the links between patient experience and clinical safety and effectiveness
  • Patients' experience of chronic illness care in a network of teaching settings
  • In This Issue: Local+Familiar=Healthier
  • Do English patients want continuity of care, and do they receive it?
  • Patient-Doctor Depth-of-Relationship Scale: Development and Validation
  • Continuity of care: Differing conceptions and values
  • Preventive Service Gains from First Contact Access in the Primary Care Home
  • Continuity of care is good for elderly people with diabetes: Retrospective cohort study of mortality and hospitalization
  • Implications of Reassigning Patients for the Medical Home: A Case Study
  • Principles of the Patient-Centered Medical Home and Preventive Services Delivery
  • Does Having a Personal Physician Improve Quality of Care in Diabetes?
  • The Generalist Approach
  • Consistency of Care and Blood Pressure Control among Elderly African Americans and Whites with Hypertension
  • How should continuity of care in primary health care be assessed?
  • Information exchange among physicians caring for the same patient in the community
  • The Medical Home: Growing Evidence to Support a New Approach to Primary Care
  • Measuring Continuity of Care in Diabetes Mellitus: An Experience-Based Measure
  • Patients' Perceptions of Interpersonal Continuity of Care
  • Effect of Improved Primary Care Access on Quality of Depression Care
  • In This Issue
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Potentially Inappropriate Prescribing Among Older Persons: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies
  • Accuracy of Signs and Symptoms for the Diagnosis of Acute Rhinosinusitis and Acute Bacterial Rhinosinusitis
  • Employment Interventions in Health Settings: A Systematic Review and Synthesis
Show more Systematic Reviews

Similar Articles

Subjects

  • Domains of illness & health:
    • Prevention
  • Methods:
    • Quantitative methods
  • Other research types:
    • Health services
  • Core values of primary care:
    • Continuity

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Early Access
  • Plain-Language Summaries
  • Multimedia
  • Podcast
  • Articles by Type
  • Articles by Subject
  • Supplements
  • Calls for Papers

Info for

  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • Job Seekers
  • Media

Engage

  • E-mail Alerts
  • e-Letters (Comments)
  • RSS
  • Journal Club
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Subscribe
  • Family Medicine Careers

About

  • About Us
  • Editorial Board & Staff
  • Sponsoring Organizations
  • Copyrights & Permissions
  • Contact Us
  • eLetter/Comments Policy

© 2025 Annals of Family Medicine