ArticleBMJ open2022
Use and usability of GP online services: a mixed-methods sequential study, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, based on qualitative interviews, analysis of routine eConsult usage and feedback data, and assessment of GP websites in Devon and Cornwall, England.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- What patients want from access to UK general practice: systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Pooled it
- Patient-facing online triage tools and clinician decision-making: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2025Pooled it
- A theory-based analysis of the implementation of online asynchronous telemedicine platforms into primary care practices using Normalisation Process Theory.BMC primary care · 2025Pooled it
- Access to general practice appointments and sustainable change: a focused ethnographic case study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Article
- Digital Information Sharing Before Consultations in General Practice: Protocol for a Scoping Review.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Digital Divide in Awareness, Want, and Adoption Across Diverse eHealth Services: Cross-Sectional Survey of Inpatients in Jinan, China.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Patterns of online consultation use in Great Britain, 2019-2023: an observational analysis.BMJ digital health & AI · 2025Article
- Article
- Access systems in general practice: a systematic scoping review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024Article
- The Use of Online Consultation Systems and Patient Experience of Primary Care: Cross-Sectional Analysis Using the General Practice Patient Survey.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Dutch GP healthcare consumption in COVID-19 heterogeneous regions: an interregional time-series approach in 2020-2021.BJGP open · 2024Article
- Effectiveness and safety of asynchronous telemedicine consultations in general practice: a systematic review.BJGP open · 2024Article
- Patients' suggestions for improvements to text-based e-consultations. An online survey of users of the national health portal in Norway.Frontiers in digital health · 2024Article
- Remote Cardiac Rehabilitation With Wearable Devices.Korean circulation journal · 2023Review
- Patient experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study in Dutch primary care.BJGP open · 2022Article
- Digital Platforms in Primary Care: Leveraging Asynchronous Consultations to Support Management of Cardiometabolic Diseases and Risk Factors.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe explored use and usability of general practitioner (GP) online services.
settingDevon and Cornwall, England.
designMixed-methods sequential study based on qualitative interviews, analysis of routine eConsult usage and feedback data, and assessment of GP websites.
methodsFirst, we interviewed 32 staff and 18 patients from seven practices in June 2018. Second, we used routinely collected consultation meta-data and, third, patient feedback data for all practices using eConsult from June 2018 to March 2021. Lastly, we examined GP websites' usability in January 2020 and September 2021.
resultsInterviews suggested practices infrequently involved patients in eConsult implementation. Some patients 'gamed' the system to achieve what they wanted. Usage data showed a major increase in eConsult resulting from COVID-19. Women used eConsult twice as much as men. Older had similar eConsult consultation rates to younger patients. Patient feedback forms were completed for fewer than 3% of consultations. Patients were mostly satisfied with eConsult but some had concerns about its length and repetitiveness, lack of continuity over time and between eConsult and medical records. We did not find clear evidence that patients' suggested improvements were acted on. Finally, few GP websites met accessibility guidelines and may hinder access to online national services such as eConsult.
conclusionGiven that, face to face, older people consult more, usage data suggest that older people have reduced online access. That the female-to-male ratio of eConsult use use was even greater than 'traditional' face-to-face ratio was unexpected and needs further research. Although eConsult collects and uses routine patient feedback to improve the system, more open systems for patient feedback, such as Care Opinion, may be more effective in helping online systems evolve. Lastly, we question the need for GP websites and suggest that national or regional services are better placed to maintain accessible services.
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.