Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38014436›Full record

ArticlePrimary health care research & development2023

Access to episodic primary care: a cross-sectional comparison of walk-in clinics and urgent primary care centers in British Columbia.

Mary A McCracken, Ian R Cooper, Michee-Ana Hamilton, Jan Klimas, Cameron Lindsay, Sarah Fletcher, Morgan Price, Lindsay Hedden, Rita K McCracken

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Primary health care research & development, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

9 authors.

Mary A McCrackenInnovation Support Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Ian R CooperInnovation Support Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Michee-Ana HamiltonInnovation Support Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5093-216X
Jan KlimasDepartment of Family Practice, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5179-0052
Cameron LindsayInnovation Support Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Sarah FletcherInnovation Support Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-6560-3772
Morgan PriceInnovation Support Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6409-1579
Lindsay HeddenFaculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC, V6T 2A1, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9552-1324
Rita K McCrackenInnovation Support Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2962-0364

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThis study aimed to identify publicly reported access characteristics for episodic primary care in BC and provided a clinic-level comparison between walk-in clinics and UPCCs.

backgroundWalk-in clinics are non-hospital-based primary care facilities that are designed to operate without appointments and provide increased healthcare access with extended hours. Urgent and Primary Care Centres (UPCCs) were introduced to British Columbia (BC) in 2018 as an additional primary care resource that provided urgent, but not emergent care during extended hours.

methodsThis cross-sectional study used publicly available data from all walk-in clinics and UPCCs in BC. A structured data collection form was used to record access characteristics from clinic websites, including business hours, weekend availability, attachment to a longitudinal family practice, and provision of virtual services.

findingsIn total, 268 clinics were included in the analysis (243 walk-in clinics, 25 UPCCs). Of those, 225 walk-in clinics (92.6%) and two UPCCs (8.0%) were attached to a longitudinal family practice. Only 153 (63%) walk-in clinics offered weekend services, compared to 24 (96%) of UPCCs. Walk-in clinics offered the majority (8,968.6/ 78.4%) of their service hours between 08:00 and 17:00, Monday to Friday. UPCCs offered the majority (889.3/ 53.7%) of their service hours after 17:00.

conclusionMost walk-in clinics were associated with a longitudinal family practice and provided the majority of clinic services during typical business hours. More research that includes patient characteristics and care outcomes, analyzed at the clinic level, may be useful to support the optimization of episodic primary healthcare delivery.

Indexed as

Ambulatory Care FacilitiesFamily PracticeBritish ColumbiaCross-Sectional StudiesHealth Services AccessibilityHumansPrimary Health Careafter-hours caredelivery of health carehealth services accessibilityprimary health care

Identifiers

PMID38014436
PMCPMC10689093

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.