ArticlePrimary health care research & development2021
Countrywide survey on utilization of medical devices by GPs in Hungary: advantages of the cluster-practice model.
Article in Primary health care research & development, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Collaboration between dentists and general practitioners in primary care clusters in Hungary.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- The development of the primary care general practitioner cluster model: experiences from Hungary.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- Motivation and experiences of dentists of primary care dental clusters in Hungary: a qualitative inquiry.Frontiers in oral health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExpectations towards general practitioners (GPs) are continuously increasing to provide a more systematic preventive- and definitive-based care, a wider range of multidisciplinary team-based services and to integrate state-of-the-art digital solutions into daily practice. Aided by development programmes, Hungarian primary care is facing the challenge to fulfil its role as the provider of comprehensive, high quality, patient-centred, preventive care, answering the challenges caused by non-communicable diseases (NCDs).
aimThe article aims to provide an insight into the utilization of simple, digital, medical devices. We show the relationship between the primary health care (PHC) practice models and the used types of devices. We point at further development directions of GP practices regarding the utilization of evidence-based medical technologies and how such devices support the screening and chronic care of patients with NCDs in everyday practice.
methodsData were collected using an online self-assessment questionnaire from 1800 Hungarian GPs registered in Hungary. Descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon's test and χ2 test were applied to analyze the ownership and utilization of 32 types of medical devices, characteristics of the GP practices and to highlight the differences between traditional and cluster-based operating model.
findingsBased on the responses from 27.7% of all Hungarian GPs, the medical device infrastructure was found to be limited especially in single GP-practices. Those involved in development projects of GP's clusters in the last decade reported a wider range and significantly more intensive utilization of evidence-based technologies (average number of devices: 5.42 versus 7.56, P<.001), but even these GPs are not using some of their devices (e.g., various point of care testing devices) due to the lack of financing. In addition, GPs involved in GPs-cluster development model programmes showed significantly greater willingness for sharing relatively expensive, extra workforce-demanding technologies (χ2 = 24.5, P<.001).
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.