Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31712292›Full record

ArticleAnnals of family medicine2019

National Trends in Primary Care Visit Use and Practice Capabilities, 2008-2015.

Aarti Rao, Zhuo Shi, Kristin N Ray, Ateev Mehrotra, Ishani Ganguli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of family medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
–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

35 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Trends in visits, imaging, and diagnosis for emergency department abdominal pain presentations in the United States, 2007-2019.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Aarti RaoIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York City, New York.
Zhuo ShiHarvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Kristin N RayDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Ateev MehrotraHarvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Ishani GanguliHarvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts iganguli@bwh.harvard.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeRecent evidence shows a national decline in primary care visit rates over the last decade. It is unclear how changes in practice-including the use and content of primary care visits-may have contributed.

methodsWe analyzed nationally representative data of adult visits to primary care physicians (PCPs) and physician practice characteristics from 2007-2016 (National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey). United States census estimates were used to calculate visits per capita. Measures included visit rates per person year; visit duration; number of medications, diagnoses, and preventive services per visit; percentage of visits with scheduled follow-up; and percentage of physicians with practice capabilities including an electronic medical record (EMR).

resultsOur weighted sample represented 3.2 billion visits (83,368 visits, unweighted). Visits per capita declined by 20% (-0.25 visits per person, 95% CI, -0.32 to -0.19) during this time, while visit duration increased by 2.4 minutes per visit (95% CI, 1.1-3.8). Per visit, PCPs addressed 0.30 more diagnoses (95% CI, 0.16-0.43) and 0.82 more medications (95% CI, 0.59-1.1), and provided 0.24 more preventive services (95% CI, 0.12-0.36). Visits with scheduled PCP followup declined by 6.0% (95% CI, -12.4 to 0.46), while PCPs reporting use of EMR increased by 44.3% (95% CI, 39.1-49.5) and those reporting use of secure messaging increased by 60.9% (95% CI, 27.5-94.3).

conclusionFrom 2008 to 2015, primary care visits were longer, addressed more issues per visit, and were less likely to have scheduled follow-up for certain patients and conditions. Meanwhile, more PCPs offered non-face-to-face care. The decline in primary care visit rates may be explained in part by PCPs offering more comprehensive in-person visits and using more non-face-to-face care.

Indexed as

Health Care SurveysAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAmbulatory CareFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOffice VisitsPractice Patterns, Physicians'Primary Health CareUnited StatesYoung AdultNational Ambulatory Medical Care Surveypreventive servicesprimary care visits

Identifiers

PMID31712292
PMCPMC6846275

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.