ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2023
Primary Care Visits in the USA and Australia 2000-2016.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2023. 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.
- Analysis of the increase in the complexity of care in family medicine.BMC primary care · 2025Observational
- Foot Disease Management by General Practitioners in People With and Without Diabetes: An Analysis of Nationally Representative Primary Care Data in Australia.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2025Article
- What Nonpsychiatrists Want From Psychiatrists: Data From Chart Review Consultation Requests in a Rural Health Care System.Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere are major concerns about the sustainability of the US primary care (PC) system.
objectiveWe use similar data from the USA and Australia on adult visits to primary care physicians to examine how primary care service delivery and content in the countries have changed since the year 2001. DESIGN/SETTING/
participantsLongitudinal analyses of nationally representative data collected in a similar manner on outpatient visits to PC in the USA (National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, NAMCS) and Australia (Bettering the Evaluation and Care of Health, BEACH), 2001-2016. MAIN MEASURES: For each visit, we ascertained the problems/diagnoses managed; the length of the visit in minutes; what medications were recorded; whether counseling, advice, or education was provided; the rate of imaging and diagnostics tests; the laboratory tests ordered; and whether the visit resulted in a referral to another physician. KEY
resultsBetween 2001 and 2016, there were 128,770 encounters with adult patients in NAMCS and 1,338,963 in BEACH. In the USA, the proportion of encounters with 3 or more problems managed increased from 28.7 to 54.8% whereas Australia started at a lower proportion (10.6%) and increased to just 14.1%. Visit times in the USA increased from 17.2 min in 2001 to 22.9 min in 2016 as compared to 14.4 min increasing to 15.2 in Australia. There were significantly more medications recorded over time in NAMCS than BEACH (2.02 in 2001 to 3.32 in 2016, USA, and 1.10 and 1.04, Australia), and US encounters resulted in imaging studies, lab tests, or referrals with relatively increasing frequency.
conclusionRelative to Australia, PC visits in the USA increasingly entail more complexity with visits that have grown comparatively longer over time, with more problems addressed, and with more content.
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.