ArticleBMJ open2023
Cross-sectional analyses of online appointment booking and repeat prescription ordering user characteristics in general practices of England in the years 2018-2020.
Article in BMJ open, 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preference for Face-to-Face Contraceptive Service Delivery Post-COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Study.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025Article
- Prescription Refill Adherence Before and After Patient Portal Registration in Among General Practice Patients in England Using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink: Longitudinal Observational Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Observational
- Differences in Use of a Patient Portal Across Sociodemographic Groups: Observational Study of the NHS App in England.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo explore the characteristics of the General Practice Patient Survey (GPPS) respondents using the different functionalities of the online services in the context of England's National Health Service General Practices. We hypothesised that respondents who are older, with lower socioeconomic status and non-white ethnicity would be less likely to use online services, while long-term conditions might increase their usage.
designCross-sectional study using respondent-level data from the GPPS in England of the years 2018, 2019 and 2020. We assessed the association between online services use and respondent characteristics using two-level mixed-effects logistic regression.
participantsSurvey respondents of the GPPS 2018-2020. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Online appointment booking and online repeat prescription ordering.
results1 807 049 survey respondents were included in this study. 15% (n=263 938) used online appointment booking in the previous 12 months, and 19% (n=339 449) had ordered a repeat prescription in the previous 12 months. Respondents with a long-term condition, on regular multiple medications, who have deafness or hearing loss and who are from the lowest deprivation quintile were more likely to have used online services. Male respondents (compared with females) and respondents with black and other ethnicity compared with white ethnicity were less likely to use online services. Respondents over 85 years old were less likely to use online appointment booking and online repeat prescription ordering compared with the younger age groups.
conclusionsSpecific groups of respondents were more likely to use online services such as patients with long-term conditions or those with deafness or hearing loss. While online services could provide efficiency to patients and practices it is essential that alternatives continue to be provided to those that cannot use or choose not to use online services. Understanding the different patients' needs could inform solutions to increase the uptake and use of the services.
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.