Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39625933›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Improving access to specialist care in correctional facilities through Ontario eConsult.

Danica Goulet, Claire Sethuram, Erin Keely, Clare Liddy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Danica GouletC. T. Lamont Primary Healthcare Research Centre, Bruyère Health Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Claire SethuramC. T. Lamont Primary Healthcare Research Centre, Bruyère Health Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4964-0183
Erin Keely(Ontario) eConsult Centre of Excellence, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Clare LiddyC. T. Lamont Primary Healthcare Research Centre, Bruyère Health Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-0699-5494

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the accessibility of multispecialty advice for primary care providers (PCPs) within correctional facilities, catering to the healthcare needs of individuals in federal custody in Ontario, Canada, through the utilization of electronic consultation (eConsult).

designRetrospective, cross-sectional, descriptive analysis.

settingeConsults submitted by PCPs within federal correctional facilities through the Ontario eConsult Service between April 1st, 2019, and March 31st, 2023.

participants906 completed eConsults were submitted by 21 PCPs in correctional facilities.

resultsThe top three specialties sent to were cardiology (46%, N = 417), dermatology (14%, N = 128), and endocrinology and metabolism (8%, N = 68). The median specialist response time was 0.9 days. The median time specialists spent responding to each case was 15 minutes. PCPs received advice on a new or additional course of action in 34% of eConsult cases. In-person specialist appointments were avoided in 81% of cases.

conclusionsOntario eConsult provides an ideal venue to improve access to multispecialty advice for people who are incarcerated. This service reduces the need for face-to-face specialist visits, decreases cost-of-care, and avoids unnecessary transportation outside of correctional facilities with potential security issues.

Indexed as

Health Services AccessibilityAdultCorrectional FacilitiesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOntarioPrimary Health CareRemote ConsultationRetrospective StudiesSpecialization

Identifiers

PMID39625933
PMCPMC11614223

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.