ArticleCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2016
Do new and traditional models of primary care differ with regard to access?: Canadian QUALICOPC study.
Article in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- What Happens to Refugees when Accessing Primary Care in the United States?: A Qualitative Meta-synthesis.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2026Review
- Are Family Medicine Clinics Improving Access to Care through Organizational Changes Driven by Healthcare Reform?Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante · 2022Observational
- General Practitioner Time Availability Per Inhabitant Per Year: A New Indicator to Measure Access to Primary Care.Frontiers in health services · 2022Article
- Expectations, values, preferences and experiences of Hungarian primary care population when accessing services: Evaluation of the patient's questionnaires of the international QUALICOPC study.Primary health care research & development · 2021Article
- Promoting cross-jurisdictional primary health care research: developing a set of common indicators across 12 community-based primary health care teams in Canada.Primary health care research & development · 2019Article
- Primary health care organizational characteristics associated with better accessibility: data from the QUALICO-PC survey in Quebec.BMC family practice · 2018Article
- Context matters for primary health care access: a multi-method comparative study of contextual influences on health service access arrangements across models of primary health care.International journal for equity in health · 2018Article
- Assessing the representativeness of physician and patient respondents to a primary care survey using administrative data.BMC family practice · 2018Article
- Patients' perceptions of access to primary care: Analysis of the QUALICOPC Patient Experiences Survey.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2018Article
- Computer use in primary care practices in Canada.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2017Article
- Family Physicians Attaching New Patients From Centralized Waiting Lists: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of primary care & community healthObservational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine access to primary care in new and traditional models using 2 dimensions of the concept of patient-centred access.
designAn international survey examining the quality and costs of primary health care (the QUALICOPC study) was conducted in 2013 in Canada. This study adopted a descriptive cross-sectional survey method using data from practices across Canada. Each participating practice filled out the Family Physician Survey and the Practice Survey, and patients in each participating practice were asked to complete the Patient Experiences Survey.
settingAll 10 Canadian provinces.
participantsA total of 759 practices and 7172 patients.
main outcome measuresIndependent t tests were conducted to examine differences between new and traditional models of care in terms of availability and accommodation, and affordability of care.
resultsOf the 759 practices, 407 were identified as having new models of care and 352 were identified as traditional. New models of care were distinct with respect to payment structure, opening hours, and having an interdisciplinary work force. Most participating practices were from large cities or suburban areas. There were few differences between new and traditional models of care regarding accessibility and accommodation in primary care. Patients under new models of care reported easier access to other physicians in the same practice, while patients from traditional models reported seeing their regular family physicians more frequently. There was no difference between the new and traditional models of care with regard to affordability of primary care. Patients attending clinics with new models of care reported that their physicians were more involved with them as a whole person than patients attending clinics based on traditional models did.
conclusionPrimary care access issues do not differ strongly between traditional and new models of care; however, patients in the new models of care believed that their physicians were more involved with them as people.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27331231PMC4721842What 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.