ReviewHealthcare management forum2023
Strength in the gap: A rapid review of principles and practices for urgent care centres.
Review in Healthcare management forum, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pharmacy Services in a Novel Urgent Care Practice.The Canadian journal of hospital pharmacy · 2026Article
- Indigenous People's Use of a Primary Urgent Care Centre at a GP-Led Primary Healthcare Service in Regional Queensland in 2020-2021.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Social Determinants of Health and Barriers in Accessing Eye Care for Refugees in the Greater Toronto Area.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Emergency department service utilisation of older patients with urgent conditions: a cross-sectional observational study.International journal of emergency medicine · 2024Article
- A novel and practical care process framework to inform model of care development.Healthcare management forum · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Responding to a provincial government decision to develop two Urgent Care Centres (UCCs) in Saskatchewan, we undertook a rapid review of published literature with the objective of determining best practices for their creation and functioning. Two English-limited PubMed database searches combining "after-hours care," "ambulatory care," "emergency medicine," "urgent care," "minor emergency," "walk-in," and "Canada" over the past 10 years were the sources of articles for our review. Articles were independently reviewed by two authors and synthesized collaboratively. From 833 articles, 44 were utilized in the review. Six considerations in the following areas were subsequently outlined: expected impact, preferred location, healthcare services collaboration, available services, staffing priorities, and community partnerships. These principles were considered against the backdrop of currently successful Canadian UCCs. This review indicates that general principles for the successful development of UCCs exist; these may guide the establishment and functioning of UCCs both in Saskatchewan and elsewhere.
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.