ArticleCanadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien2024
Care-seeking experiences of unattached patients in the Canadian health care system: Qualitative study.
Article in Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Attributes of family physician encounters valued by older adults: a systematic review.BMC primary care · 2025Pooled it
- An ounce of "superscreener": A novel cancer screening program targeting unattached individuals.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2026Article
- Primary care unattachment: impact on mortality, hospitalizations and costs.Health affairs scholar · 2026Article
- Exploring user experiences in a novel primary care center: a qualitative grounded theory study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo understand how lack of attachment to a regular primary care provider influences patients' outlooks on primary care, ability to address their health care needs, and confidence in the health care system.
designQualitative descriptive study using semistructured interviews.
settingCanadian provinces of Nova Scotia, Ontario, and Quebec.
participantsPatients aged 18 years or older who were unattached or had become attached within 1 year of being interviewed and who resided in the province in which they were interviewed.
methodsForty-one semistructured interviews were conducted, during which participants were asked to describe how they had become unattached, their searches to find new primary care providers, their perceptions of and experiences with the centralized waiting list in their province, their experiences seeking care while unattached, and the impact of being unattached on their health and on their perceptions of the health care system. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using a thematic approach. MAIN
findingsTwo main themes were identified in interviews with unattached or recently attached patients: unmet needs of unattached patients and the impact of being unattached. Patients' perceived benefits of attachment included access to care, longitudinal relationships with health care providers, health history familiarity, and follow-up monitoring and care coordination. Being unattached was associated with negative effects on mental health, poor health outcomes, decreased confidence in the health care system, and greater pre-existing health inequities.
conclusionHaving a regular primary care provider is essential to having access to high-quality care and other health care services. Attachment also promotes health equity and confidence in the public health care system and has broader system-level, social, and policy implications.
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.