ArticleScientific reports2024
Impact of COVID-19 national response on primary care utilisation in Singapore: an interrupted time-series analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. 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.
- Physician Feedback Reduces Antibiotic Prescribing for Uncomplicated Upper Respiratory Tract Infection in the Emergency Department.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on urban-rural outpatient primary care utilisation in Malaysia: a retrospective time series and spatiotemporal analysis.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- The Family Doctor in the "COVID-19 Era".Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
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
Abstract
Since the start of the pandemic, many national responses, such as nationwide lockdowns, have been implemented to curb the spread of COVID-19. We aim to assess the impact of Singapore's national responses on primary care utilisation. We performed an interrupted time series using acute and chronic primary care data of 3 168 578 visits between 1 September 2019 and 31 August 2020 over four periods: before any measures were put in place, during Disease Outbreak Response System Condition (DORSCON) Orange, when Circuit Breaker was instituted, and when Circuit Breaker was lifted. We found significant mean reductions in acute and chronic primary care visits immediately following DORSCON Orange and Circuit Breaker. DORSCON Orange was associated with - 2020 mean daily visits (95% CI - 2890 to - 1150). Circuit Breaker was associated with a further - 2510 mean daily visits (95% CI - 3660 to - 1360). Primary care utilisation for acute visits remained below baseline levels even after the Circuit Breaker was lifted. These significant reductions were observed in both acute and chronic visits, with acute visits experiencing a steeper drop during DORSCON Orange. Understanding the impact of COVID-19 measures on primary care utilisation will be useful for future public health planning.
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.