Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39350210›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2024

Access to healthcare services during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional analysis of income and user-access across 16 economically diverse countries.

Zachary D V Abel, Laurence S J Roope, Raymond Duch, Philip M Clarke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Digital Health and Primary Health Care Quality: A Survey Case Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

4 authors.

Zachary D V AbelHealth Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK. zachary.abel@dph.ox.ac.uk.
Laurence S J RoopeHealth Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK.
Raymond DuchNuffield College, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX1 1NF, UK.
Philip M ClarkeHealth Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNational health systems have different strengths and resilience levels. During the COVID-19 pandemic, resources often had to be reallocated and this impacted the availability of healthcare services in many countries. To date there have been few quantitative contemporary studies of inequalities in access to healthcare within and between countries. In this study, we aim to compare inequality within and between 16 economically diverse countries.

methodsOnline surveys were conducted on 22 150 adults in 16 countries across six continents in 2022. Quota sampling and post-stratification weighting was used to obtain an age, gender, geographically, and educationally representative sample. The study assesses the differences in challenges in access to healthcare during the pandemic (for GP, surgical/clinical and digital GP services) using country-specific expanded health-needs-adjusted Erreygers' concentration indices and compares these values between countries using a Spearman's rank correlation coefficient.

resultsResults show wide variation in income-related challenges in access within countries for different types of care. For example, Erreygers' concentration index for digital services in Colombia exhibited highly regressive inequality at 0·17, compared to Japan with an index of -0·15. Inequalities between countries were also evident, with Spearman rank coefficients of -0·69 and -0·65 (p-values of 0·003 and 0·006) for digital and surgical access, indicating that lower income countries had greater inequality in healthcare access challenges.

conclusionDuring the pandemic, inequalities in challenges to accessing healthcare were greatest in low and middle-income countries. Digital technologies offer a reasonable means to address some of this inequality if adequate support is provided and accessible digital infrastructure exists.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health Services AccessibilityAdolescentAdultAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealthcare DisparitiesHumansIncomeMaleMiddle AgedPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Socioeconomic FactorsYoung AdultCOVID-19Health accessSocioeconomic inequality in health

Identifiers

PMID39350210
PMCPMC11443786

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.