ArticleNPJ digital medicine2025
Virtual urgent care in an integrated value based healthcare system.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Community-Level Digital Health Readiness Index for the US.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Regional Virtual Acute Care Helpline in Singapore at a National University Health System Virtual Care Centre: Retrospective Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Virtual urgent care (VUC) is not well understood when delivered through an integrated value-based healthcare system. The Southern California Permanente Medical Group operates Get Care Now (GCN), a VUC program complementing its urgent care clinics (UCC). Quality and patient experience dimensions are included in this study, comparing GCN and UCC patients. Females and Hispanics/Latinos were predominant in both groups and proportions of patients with chronic conditions were nearly identical within the leading 30-49 age band. Wait times for GCN were 21.19 min lower than for UCC, and positive patient survey results align with GCN's average Net Promoter Score of 87. 3-day return rates to the ED (2.53% GCN vs. 3.26% UCC) and to UCC (5.44% GCN vs. 2.42% UCC) were comparable between GCN and UCC utilizers. Findings demonstrate that 24/7 VUC sustainably supports meeting patient demand for urgent care services in an integrated value-based system.
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.