ArticleBJGP open2021
The provision of additional services in primary care: a cross-sectional study of incentivised additional services, social deprivation, and ethnic group.
Article in BJGP open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Continuity of care in UK primary care: a scoping review of measures, challenges, and future interventions.Primary health care research & development · 2026Article
- Adjusting primary-care funding by deprivation: a cross-sectional study of Lower layer Super Output Areas in England.BJGP open · 2025Article
- Article
- Primary care funding entrenches health inequalities: time for a rethink.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrimary care in England is contracted to provide essential services. Many practices also provide additional services, termed 'directed enhanced services' (DES), for extra income. The optional nature of DES may result in inequitable service delivery.
aimTo determine the range of DES activity and equity of service provision. DESIGN &
settingA cross-sectional analysis of data from general practices in England took place from 2018-2019.
methodDES were defined in terms of activity level and measured as total DES funding per registered patient. Linear regression modelling was used to explore the relationship between DES activity, practice, and population characteristics.
resultsData were available for 6873 practices providing up to 10 DES in the initial sample. Due to negative funding amounts and a list size of ≤750 registered patients, 24 practices were excluded. Of the final sample (
conclusionDES provision is lower in deprived areas (notably for immunisations and some aspects of access) but higher in better staffed practices. Voluntary quality schemes may contribute to widening health inequalities.
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.