ArticlePloS one2024
Rationale and study protocol of a regional health panel in Saxony, Germany (GEPASA).
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe citizens' perspectives on health care are central to the assessment of the health care situation and to regional development. In Germany, however, strategic goals for health care delivery are planned based on population statistics and partly on regional morbidity. Saxony is a German federal state with high average age and low density of physicians which makes the population perspective on quality of health care especially intersting. No existing panel surveys cover issues related to the perceived quality of health care delivery on a regional level in Germany.
aimWe aim to conduct a longitudinal panel study of the perceived health status and perceived quality of health care of the Saxon citizens as a basis for the systematic derivation of health care goals/measures and target group-specific, regionally suitable prevention measures.
methodsWith an anticipated 15% response rate, 15,000 potential participants have to be contacted to achieve a calculated sample size of about 2,250 participants. The questionnaire will be circulated every other year with the option for adaptations depending on insights of each panel wave. The study protocol was approved by the local ethics committee of the Technische Universität Dresden, Germany (ethical approval code BO-EK-320072022) and has been registered at the German Clinical Trials Register as the German WHO primary registry (study registration number DRKS00031229). DISCUSSION AND OUTLOOK: The results are intended to identify gaps in health care and to develop patient-centered health care goals for the region together with stakeholders in Saxon health care planning. At the same time, longitudinal data allow mapping of perceived health status and perceived health care trends.
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.