Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37500185›Full record

ArticleHealthcare management forum2023

The best defence is a good offence: Ensuring equitable access to primary care in Canada.

Lindsay Hedden, Kimberlyn McGrail

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Research data use in a digital society: a deliberative public engagement.International journal of population data science · 2024
    Article
  6. Typology of virtual primary care in Canada: Making the implications clear.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien
    Article
  7. Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien
    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

2 authors.

Lindsay HeddenSimon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9552-1324
Kimberlyn McGrailThe University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ensuring access to primary care is a persistent challenge in Canada, and the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated existing gaps. Public policy reform that only partially addresses these access issues, technological opportunities, workforce desires, or patient preferences creates an opportunity for private, investor-owned corporations to take ownership of primary care delivery systems. This article summarizes the history of the "public-private" conversation as it pertains to primary care, with a particular focus on investor-owned corporations. We outline how profit-driven, corporate healthcare impacts equitable access to care, increases spending on low-value services, and undermines the underlying values of Canadian healthcare systems. All of healthcare delivery requires rapid regulation and oversight by policy-makers, which would increase transparency of corporate care. There also must be parallel efforts placed on addressing the long-standing issues in publicly funded delivery of primary care that created the space for corporate care to grow.

Indexed as

Access to Primary CareCOVID-19CanadaDelivery of Health CareHumansPandemics

Identifiers

PMID37500185
PMCPMC10448912

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.