Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • COVID-19
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Editors' Blog
    • Email Alerts
  • Info For
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • About
    • The JABFM
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
  • Classifieds
  • More
    • Email Alerts
    • Feedback
    • ABFM News
    • Folders
    • Help
  • Other Publications
    • abfm

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
American Board of Family Medicine
  • Other Publications
    • abfm
American Board of Family Medicine

American Board of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • COVID-19
    • Ahead of Print
    • Archives
    • Abstracts In Press
    • Editors' Blog
    • Email Alerts
  • Info For
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
  • SUBMIT
    • Manuscript
    • Peer Review
  • About
    • The JABFM
    • Editorial Board
    • Indexing
  • Classifieds
  • More
    • Email Alerts
    • Feedback
    • ABFM News
    • Folders
    • Help
  • JABFM On Twitter
  • JABFM On YouTube
  • JABFM On Facebook
ReplyCorrespondence

Response: Re: Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine Issue on Communities of Solution

Sarah E. Lesko, Kim S. Griswold and John M. Westfall; for the Folsom Group
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine September 2013, 26 (5) 613-614; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2013.05.130192
Sarah E. Lesko
drlesko@gmail.com
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: drlesko@gmail.com
Kim S. Griswold
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
John M. Westfall
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site

We appreciate the thoughtful comments of Burns and Gottlieb1 and agree with many of their points. Throughout our work examining the Folsom Report,2 we have noted many of the same pitfalls regarding current fledgling communities of solution (COSs): the lack of rigorous research, outcomes data, and nationwide or regional networks. Burns and Gottlieb's cogent suggestions to further the rigor of COSs and assess outcomes are critical next steps.

Health care providers are crucial members in a COS. While some barriers to provider inclusion do exist, providers often choose not to participate because of other pressing work or lack of payment for community-focused work. Alternatively, providers do not necessarily have to lead a COS but can join instead as partners. Groups may more willingly add providers to their invite lists if the providers are merely one of the stakeholders.

The concept of any particular local COS is not always scalable; it may not provide evidence for the same solution in another COS. However, there is a need for a lattice that can connect COSs for ideas, support, funding, research.

Health insurers and hospitals also play an important role in concordance with their mandates for community benefits. Funding agencies and foundations could consider supporting a national research network to inform the coalition of public health and primary care across jurisdictions. Hopefully future work will feature COS outcomes on population health.

References

  1. 1.
    1. Burns A,
    2. Gottlieb LM
    . Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine issue on communities of solution [letter]. J Am Board Fam Med 2013;26:612–3.
  2. 2.
    Folsom Group Communities of solution: the Folsom Report revisited. Ann Fam Med 2012;10:250–60.

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Authors & Reviewers

  • Info For Authors
  • Info For Reviewers
  • Submit A Manuscript/Review

Other Services

  • Get Email Alerts
  • Classifieds
  • Reprints and Permissions

Other Resources

  • Forms
  • Contact Us

© 2021 American Board of Family Medicine

Powered by HighWire