ArticlePublic health in practice (Oxford, England)2025
Exploring network relations between healthcare access and utilisation in individuals with rare diseases.
Article in Public health in practice (Oxford, England), 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Rare diseases affect fewer than one in 2000 people and impact approximately 400 million individuals globally. High costs, uncoordinated care, and inadequate provider knowledge pose challenges to rare disease care. We aimed to examine the relationship between healthcare access and utilisation among rare disease patients in Switzerland. Study design: A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 314 individuals with a rare disease. Methods: Participants completed the Perception of Access to Healthcare Questionnaire (PAHQ) and provided data on healthcare utilisation (institutional and provider levels). Network analysis assessed nodes were based on expected influence (EI), predictability, and bridge centrality (BC). Results: Four PAHQ subscales (acceptability, availability, adequacy, and awareness) exhibited higher EI and predictability. Conversely, accessibility and affordability of healthcare services had lower EI and predictability scores. In terms of healthcare utilisation, hospitals, private practices, general practictioners (GPs), mental health professionals, and emergency services demonstrated elevated EI and predictability. Specialists and holistic healthcare providers exhibited lower EI and predictability. Affordability, disease course, as well as hospital, and GP utilisation had elevated BC values and emerged as key connectors between access and utilisation. Conclusion: This study illuminates the intricate dynamics of healthcare experiences for patients with rare diseases. This work validates network analysis as a valuable tool for examining healthcare systems. Findings can inform policies that address challenges faced by this vulnerable population, namely care integration for individuals with an unstable disease course.
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.