Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28685827›Full record

ArticleHealth services research2018

Spatial Accessibility of Primary Care in England: A Cross-Sectional Study Using a Floating Catchment Area Method.

Jan Bauer, Ruth Müller, Dörthe Brüggmann, David A Groneberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health services research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Spatial Accessibility of Primary Care in the Dual Public-Private Health System in Rural Areas, Malaysia.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  8. Assessing Spatial Accessibility of Community Hospitals for the Elderly in Beijing, China.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Assessing Spatial Accessibility to Primary Health Care Services in Beijing, China.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jan BauerInstitute of Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Goethe University, Frankfurt/Main, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6267-9731
Ruth MüllerInstitute of Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Goethe University, Frankfurt/Main, Germany.
Dörthe BrüggmannInstitute of Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Goethe University, Frankfurt/Main, Germany.
David A GronebergInstitute of Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Goethe University, Frankfurt/Main, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo analyze the general practitioners (GPs) with regard to the degree of urbanization, social deprivation, general health, and disability. DATA SOURCES: Small area population data and GP practice data in England. STUDY

designWe used a floating catchment area method to measure spatial GP accessibility with regard to the degree of urbanization, social deprivation, general health, and disability. DATA COLLECTION: Data were collected from the Office for National Statistics and the general practice census and analyzed using a geographic information system. PRINCIPAL

findingsIn all, 25.8 percent of the population in England lived in areas with a significant low GP accessibility (mean z-score: -4.2); 27.6 percent lived in areas with a significant high GP accessibility (mean z-score: 7.7); 97.8 percent of high GP accessibility areas represented urban areas, and 31.1 percent of low GP accessibility areas represented rural areas (correlation of accessibility and urbanity: r = 0.59; p<.001). Furthermore, a minor negative correlation with social deprivation was present (r = -0.19; p<.001). Results were confirmed by a multivariate analysis.

conclusionThis study showed substantially differing GP accessibility throughout England. However, socially deprived areas did not have poorer spatial access to GPs.

Indexed as

Catchment Area, HealthCross-Sectional StudiesDemographyEnglandGeneral PracticeHealth Services AccessibilityHealth StatusHumansPersons with DisabilitiesPrimary Health CareResidence CharacteristicsSpatial AnalysisState MedicineAccessEnglandGISGPsocial deprivation

Identifiers

PMID28685827
PMCPMC5980177

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.