Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32854623›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2020

The quality of primary care in community health centers: comparison among urban, suburban and rural users in Shanghai, China.

Jianwei Shi, Hua Jin, Leiyu Shi, Chen Chen, Xuhua Ge, Yuan Lu, Hanzhi Zhang, Zhaoxin Wang, Dehua Yu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Assessing Spatial Accessibility of Community Hospitals for the Elderly in Beijing, China.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    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

9 authors.

Jianwei ShiSchool of Public Health, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, 227 Chongqing South RD, Shanghai, 200025, China.
Hua JinDepartment of General Practice, Yangpu Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, 450 Tengyue RD, Shanghai, 200090, China.
Leiyu ShiDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Primary Care Policy Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
Chen ChenShanghai Jing 'an District Jiangning Road Community Health Service Center, Shanghai, 200041, China.
Xuhua GeDepartment of General Practice, Yangpu Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, 450 Tengyue RD, Shanghai, 200090, China.
Yuan LuDepartment of General Practice, Yangpu Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, 450 Tengyue RD, Shanghai, 200090, China.
Hanzhi ZhangDepartment of General Practice, Yangpu Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, 450 Tengyue RD, Shanghai, 200090, China.
Zhaoxin WangSchool of Public Health, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, 227 Chongqing South RD, Shanghai, 200025, China. supercell002@sina.com.
Dehua YuDepartment of General Practice, Yangpu Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, 450 Tengyue RD, Shanghai, 200090, China. shgprc@yeah.net.

Funding

Data extraction was financially funded by the Natural Science Foundation of China 71603182Data extraction was financially funded by the Natural Science Foundation of China 71774116Excellent Young Talents Fund Program of Higher Education Institutions of Anhui Province 2018YQ52Shanghai Pujiang Program 2019PJC072The analysis and interpretation of the data guided by the statisticians were funded by the supported by grants from the National Key R&D Program of China 2018YFC2000700
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveFollowing World Health Organization's initiatives to advance primary care, China put forth forceful policies including the Personal Family Doctor Contract to ensure that every family sign up with a qualified doctor in a community health center (CHC) ever since its 2009 New Health Reform. We used the Johns Hopkins-designed Primary Care Assessment Tool (PCAT) to assess primary care quality experienced by the contracted residents and compare this across different socioeconomic regions.

methodsUsing a multistage sampling method, four CHCs each were randomly selected from urban, suburban and rural districts of Shanghai, a metropolitan with 24 million residents. ANOVA and Multivariate analyses were used to assess the association between location of CHC and the quality of primary care experience.

findingsA total of 2404 CHC users completed our survey. Except for the domain of coordination (information systems), users from suburban CHCs reported best primary care experiences in all other domains, followed by users of rural CHCs. After controlling for covariates, suburban CHC users were more likely to report higher total PCAT scores (ß = 1.57, P <  0.001) compared with those from urban CHCs.

conclusionThat contracted residents from suburban CHCs reporting better primary care experience than those from urban CHCs demonstrates the unique value of CHCs in relatively medical-underserved areas. In particular, urban CHCs could further strengthen first contact (utilization), first contact (accessibility), coordination (referral system), comprehensiveness (available), and community orientation aspects of primary care performance. However, all CHCs could improve coordination (information system).

Indexed as

Health Care ReformPublic HealthChinaCommunity Health CentersCross-Sectional StudiesHumansPrimary Health CareQuality of Health CareCommunity health centersPCATPrimary careQuality

Identifiers

PMID32854623
PMCPMC7453522

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.