ArticleBMC primary care2024
Social disparities in access and quality of consultation in outpatient care in Germany.
Article in BMC primary care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Urgent care utilization patterns in Switzerland: a population-based cross-sectional study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Patient Preferences for In-Person vs Remote Care for Long-Term Conditions.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Attitudes towards the dual health insurance system and inequalities in health care in Germany - results of a population survey.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Socioeconomic Trends in Outcomes of Rehabilitation Among Patients With Systemic Connective Tissue Disorders in Germany: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Routine Data.International journal of rheumatic diseases · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOverall, research on social determinants of access and quality of outpatient care in Germany is scarce. Therefore, social disparities (according to sex, age, income, migration background, and health insurance) in perceived access and quality of consultation in outpatient care (primary care physicians and specialists) in Germany were explored in this study.
methodsAnalyses made use of a cross-sectional online survey. An adult population sample was randomly drawn from a panel which was recruited offline (N = 2,201). Perceived access was assessed by waiting time for an appointment (in days) and travel time to the practice (in minutes), while quality of consultation was measured by consultation time (in minutes) and quality of communication (scale of four items, Cronbach's Alpha 0.89).
resultsIn terms of primary care, perceived access and quality of consultation was worse among women compared to men. Estimated consultation time was shorter among people with statutory health insurance compared to privately insured respondents. Regarding specialist care, people aged 60 years and older reported shorter waiting times and better quality of communication. Lower income groups reported lower quality of communication, while perceived access and quality of consultation was worse among respondents with a statutory health insurance. Variances explained by the social characteristics ranged between 1% and 4% for perceived access and between 3% and 7% for quality of consultation.
conclusionWe found social disparities in perceived access and quality of consultation in outpatient care in Germany. Such disparities in access may indicate structural discrimination, while disparities in quality of consultation may point to interpersonal discrimination in health care.
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.