ArticleBMJ open2018
Primary care in Germany: access and utilisation-a cross-sectional study with data from the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Procurement in German office based ambulatory physician practices: system specific challenges and evidence based management strategies.Health economics review · 2026Article
- Socioeconomic determinants of COVID-19 incidence in a German rural area.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Spatial and temporal disparities in general practitioner provision: a 21-year longitudinal analysis from Lower Saxony, Germany.International journal of health geographics · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Perceptions, Expectations, and Concerns of Community Pharmacists in Germany Regarding Prescribing by Pharmacists.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Forgone and delayed care in Germany- inequalities and perceived health risk of unmet need.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- Social disparities in access and quality of consultation in outpatient care in Germany.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Cancer incidence and digital information seeking in Germany: a retrospective observational study.Scientific reports · 2024Observational
- The role of mesolevel characteristics of the health care system and socioeconomic factors on health care use - results of a scoping review.International journal for equity in health · 2024Article
- [Access to cardiological care infrastructure in the federal state of Brandenburg considering the local care needs].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2023Article
- Article
- Urban-rural differences in health literacy in the metropolitan area of Berlin, Germany, and its surroundings.European journal of public health · 2023Article
- Observational
- Spatial accessibility of general inpatient care in Germany: an analysis of surgery, internal medicine and neurology.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Domain-specific effects of physical activity on the demand for physician visits.International journal of public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectives(1) To describe the accessibility of general practitioners (GPs) by the German population; (2) to determine factors on individual and area level, such as settlement structure and area deprivation, which are associated with the walking distance to a GP; and (3) to identify factors that may cause differences in the utilisation of any doctors.
designCross-sectional study using individual survey data from the representative German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) linked with area deprivation data from the German Index of Multiple Deprivation for 2010 (GIMD 2010) and official data for settlement structure (urban/rural areas) at district level. Logistic regression models were estimated to determine the relationship of individual and area factors with the distance to a GP. Negative binomial regressions were used to analyse the association with utilisation.
settingGermany. POPULATION: n=20 601 respondents from the SOEP survey data 2009. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Walking distance to a GP. SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Doctor visits.
resultsNearly 70% of the sample lives within a 20 min walk to a GP. People living in the most deprived areas have a 1.4-fold (95% CI 1.3 to 1.6) increased probability of a greater walking distance compared with the least deprived quintile, even after controlling for settlement structure and individual factors. In rural districts, people have a 3.1-fold (95% CI 2.8 to 3.4) higher probability of a greater walking distance compared with those in cities. Both area deprivation and rurality have a negative relationship with the utilisation of physicians, whereas the distance to a GP is not associated with the utilisation of physicians.
conclusionWalking distance to a GP depends on individual and area factors. In Germany, area deprivation is negatively correlated with the accessibility of GPs while controlling for settlement structure and individual factors. Both area factors are negatively associated with the utilisation of doctors. This knowledge could be used for future GP requirement plans.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.