Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37129943›Full record

ArticleJMIR public health and surveillance2023

Consultation Rate and Mode by Deprivation in English General Practice From 2018 to 2022: Population-Based Study.

Emma Maria Vestesson, Kaat Lieve An De Corte, Elizabeth Crellin, Jean Ledger, Minal Bakhai, Geraldine M Clarke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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 · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Evolution of the general practice receptionist role and online services: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Challenges to quality in contemporary, hybrid general practice a multi-site longitudinal case study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Primary care transformation in Scotland: a qualitative evaluation of the views of patients.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Patients' experiences of GP consultations following the introduction of the new GP contract in Scotland: a cross-sectional survey.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    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

6 authors.

Emma Maria VestessonThe Health Foundation, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7284-9172
Kaat Lieve An De CorteThe Health Foundation, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4370-2606
Elizabeth CrellinThe Health Foundation, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8774-224X
Jean LedgerNational Health Service England, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2523-7971
Minal BakhaiNational Health Service England, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0009-0001-6330-4867
Geraldine M ClarkeThe Health Foundation, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7249-0289

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on primary care service delivery with an increased use of remote consultations. With general practice delivering record numbers of appointments and rising concerns around access, funding, and staffing in the UK National Health Service, we assessed contemporary trends in consultation rate and modes (ie, face-to-face versus remote).

objectiveThis paper describes trends in consultation rates in general practice in England for key demographics before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. We explore the use of remote and face-to-face consultations with regard to socioeconomic deprivation to understand the possible effect of changes in consultation modes on health inequalities.

methodsWe did a retrospective analysis of 9,429,919 consultations by general practitioners, nurses, or other health care professionals between March 2018 and February 2022 for patients registered at 397 general practices in England. We used routine electronic health records from Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum with linkage to national data sets. Negative binomial models were used to predict consultation rates and modes (ie, remote versus face-to-face) by age, sex, and socioeconomic deprivation over time.

resultsOverall consultation rates increased by 15% from 4.92 in 2018-2019 to 5.66 in 2021-2022 with some fluctuation during the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. The breakdown into face-to-face and remote consultations shows that the pandemic precipitated a rapid increase in remote consultations across all groups, but the extent varies by age. Consultation rates increased with increasing levels of deprivation. Socioeconomic differences in consultation rates, adjusted for sex and age, halved during the pandemic (from 0.36 to 0.18, indicating more consultations in the most deprived), effectively narrowing relative differences between deprivation quintiles. This trend remains when stratified by sex, but the difference across deprivation quintiles is smaller for men. The most deprived saw a relatively larger increase in remote and decrease in face-to-face consultation rates compared to the least deprived.

conclusionsThe substantial increases in consultation rates observed in this study imply an increased pressure on general practice. The narrowing of consultation rates between deprivation quintiles is cause for concern, given ample evidence that health needs are greater in more deprived areas.

Indexed as

COVID-19General PracticeHumansMalePandemicsReferral and ConsultationRetrospective StudiesState Medicineagecare deliveryClinical Practice Research DatalinkcohortconsultconsultationCOVID-19CPRD Aurumdatabasedata linkdata linkagedeprivationelectronic health recordsEnglandgeneral practicehealth inequalitiesIMDIndex of Multiple Deprivationinformation managementlongitudinalpandemicperson-yearpopulation dataprimary carerandomremote consultationssex

Identifiers

PMID37129943
PMCPMC10189615

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.