Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31185940›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2019

Public preferences for primary care provision in Germany - a discrete choice experiment.

Kim-Sarah Krinke, Ulla Tangermann, Volker Eric Amelung, Christian Krauth

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Barriers to and enablers of the promotion of patient and family participation in primary healthcare nursing in Brazil, Germany and Spain: A qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Article
  5. Priority setting in the German healthcare system: results from a discrete choice experiment.International journal of health economics and management · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Patient Input in Regional Healthcare Planning-A Meaningful Contribution.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    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.

Kim-Sarah KrinkeHannover Medical School, Institute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health Systems Research, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany. Krinkekim@gmail.com.
Ulla TangermannHannover Medical School, Institute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health Systems Research, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
Volker Eric AmelungHannover Medical School, Institute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health Systems Research, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
Christian KrauthHannover Medical School, Institute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health Systems Research, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrimary care is a central element of healthcare and addresses the main health problems of the population. While primary care gains in importance due to an aging population, there is an ongoing debate on physician shortages in German rural regions. The study aims on analyzing the population's preferences on primary healthcare and, therefore, on helping policy makers to make care delivery more responsive to patients' needs when planning political reforms of primary care.

methodsA paper-based discrete choice experiment (DCE) was used to assess preferences of the population of eight rural regions in Germany. Based on literature search and qualitative research, six attributes were selected and included in the choice experiment. The survey presented participants with eight choice sets in which they had to choose between two possible scenarios of care. A conditional logistic regression as well as a latent class model (LCM) were used to analyze preferences for primary healthcare.

resultsNine hundred four participants completed the survey (response rate 46.1%). The conditional logistic regression showed significant impact of the attributes "home visits", "distance to practice", "number of healthcare providers", "opening hours of the practice", and "diagnostic facilities" on the respondents' choices of primary healthcare alternatives. Moreover, the LCM identified four classes that can be characterized by preference homogeneity within and heterogeneity between the classes.

conclusionAlthough the study revealed heterogeneous preferences among the latent classes, several similarities in preferences for primary care could be detected. The knowledge on these public preferences may help policy makers when implementing new models of primary care and, thus, raise the populations' acceptance of future primary care provision and innovative care models.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorConsumer BehaviorHealth PolicyAdultAgedDelivery of Health CareFemaleGermanyHouse CallsHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrimary Health CareTime FactorsDiscrete choice experimentPreferencesPrimary care

Identifiers

PMID31185940
PMCPMC6560870

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.