ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2002
Qualitative insights into practice time management: does 'patient-centred time' in practice management offer a portal to improved access?
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Access to primary care for socioeconomically disadvantaged older people in rural areas: a realist review.BMJ open · 2016Review
- Patient demographics as a predictive tool of consultation duration.London journal of primary care · 2014Article
- Open-access versus bookable appointment systems: survey of patients attending appointments with general practitioners.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2004Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDifferent sets of literature suggest how aspects of practice time management can limit access to general practitioner (GP) care. Researchers have not organised this knowledge into a unified framework that can enhance understanding of barriers to, and opportunities for, improved access.
aimTo suggest a framework conceptualising how differences in professional and cultural understanding of practice time management in Auckland, New Zealand, influence access to GP care for children with chronic asthma. DESIGN OF STUDY: A qualitative study involving selective sampling, semi-structured interviews on barriers to access, and a general inductive approach.
settingTwenty-nine key informants and ten mothers of children with chronic, moderate to severe asthma and poor access to GP care in Auckland.
methodDevelopment of a framework from themes describing barriers associated with, and needs for, practice time management. The themes were independently identified by two authors from transcribed interviews and confirmed through informant checking. Themes from key informant and patient interviews were triangulated with each other and with published literature.
resultsThe framework distinguishes 'practice-centred time' from 'patient-centred time.' A predominance of 'practice-centred time' and an unmet opportunity for 'patient-centred time' are suggested by the persistence of five barriers to accessing GP care: limited hours of opening; traditional appointment systems; practice intolerance of missed appointments; long waiting times in the practice; and inadequate consultation lengths. None of the barriers is specific to asthmatic children.
conclusionA unified framework was suggested for understanding how the organisation of practice work time can influence access to GP care by groups including asthmatic children.
Indexed as
Identifiers
12528583PMC1314467What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.