Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35266129›Full record

Observational studyJournal of general internal medicine2022

Configuration and Delivery of Primary Care in Rural and Urban Settings.

Taressa K Fraze, Valerie A Lewis, Andrew Wood, Helen Newton, Carrie H Colla

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of general internal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
7.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Rural-urban disparities in primary care and geographic continuity of care for children with medical complexity.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Taressa K FrazeDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Healthforce Center, Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA. Taressa.Fraze@ucsf.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-8346-6425
Valerie A LewisDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Andrew WoodThe Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA.
Helen NewtonSchool of Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA.
Carrie H CollaThe Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA.
Dartmouth College · USLee University · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USYale University · US

Funding

PA-20-072: Accelerating the Use of Evidence-based Innovation in Healthcare SystemsU19HS024075 · AHRQ · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI MEARA, ELLEN R. · 2015 to 2021
$19.8M
AHRQ HHS U19 HS024075
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere are concerns about the capacity of rural primary care due to potential workforce shortages and patients with disproportionately more clinical and socioeconomic risks. Little research examines the configuration and delivery of primary care along the spectrum of rurality.

objectiveCompare structure, capabilities, and payment reform participation of isolated, small town, micropolitan, and metropolitan physician practices, and the characteristics and utilization of their Medicare beneficiaries.

designObservational study of practices defined using IQVIA OneKey, 2017 Medicare claims, and, for a subset, the National Survey of Healthcare Organizations and Systems (response rate=47%).

participantsA total of 27,716,967 beneficiaries with qualifying visits who were assigned to practices. MAIN MEASURES: We characterized practices' structure, capabilities, and payment reform participation and measured beneficiary utilization by rurality. KEY

resultsRural practices were smaller, more primary care dominant, and system-owned, and had more beneficiaries per practice. Beneficiaries in rural practices were more likely to be from high-poverty areas and disabled. There were few differences in patterns of outpatient utilization and practices' care delivery capabilities. Isolated and micropolitan practices reported less engagement in quality-focused payment programs than metropolitan practices. Beneficiaries cared for in more rural settings received fewer recommended mammograms and had higher overall and condition-specific readmissions. Fewer beneficiaries with diabetes in rural practices had an eye exam. Most isolated rural beneficiaries traveled to more urban communities for care.

conclusionsWhile most isolated Medicare beneficiaries traveled to more urban practices for outpatient care, those receiving care in rural practices had similar outpatient and inpatient utilization to urban counterparts except for readmissions and quality metrics that rely on services outside of primary care. Rural practices reported similar care capabilities to urban practices, suggesting that despite differences in workforce and demographics, rural patterns of primary care delivery are comparable to urban.

Indexed as

MedicareRural PopulationAgedAmbulatory CareDelivery of Health CareHumansPrimary Health CareUnited Statesaccess to careinpatient utilizationoutpatient utilizationpracticesprimary carerural health

Identifiers

PMID35266129
PMCPMC9485295
OpenAlexW4220850713

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.