ArticlePloS one2025
Living with cystic fibrosis during the COVID-19 pandemic: An interpretive description of healthcare access from patients with cystic fibrosis and their providers in Alberta, Canada.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A qualitative study of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare access and service delivery for people living with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma.Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe current study aimed to explore patient and provider perspectives of the impact of the pandemic on cystic fibrosis healthcare access and service delivery.
methodsWe used Interpretive Description, a qualitative approach with the end-goal of informing decisions and actions in clinical practice by generating findings that are clinically meaningful and useful. Levesque et al.'s "Conceptual framework of access to health care" informed the development of our interview guides. Interviews were conducted via telephone or Zoom and confidentially transcribed verbatim. Data generation and analysis occurred concurrently to allow for iterative refinements of the interview guides. Analysis was informed by Braun and Clarke's six phases of reflexive thematic analysis. Strategies to enhance rigour and trustworthiness of the findings were utilized.
resultsWe completed 13 interviews: 8 with patients and 5 with providers. Three key themes were generated: (a) Tensions due to infection prevention at micro- meso-, and macro- levels; (b) Modifying aspects of person-focused care can bolster perceived quality of clinical encounters; and (c) Accessibility of appropriate healthcare services could improve efficiency of service delivery. Infection prevention at the individual level was not found to be burdensome. Society's compliance with public health measures, or lack thereof, impacted the level of stigma and anxiety experienced by patients with cystic fibrosis. A changed model of care reliant on patient self-report instead of clinician-led testing and in-person assessment due to the transition to virtual care was associated with mixed perceptions since patients with cystic fibrosis were comfortable making care decisions but many participants (patient and provider) felt challenged by the lack of objective data for decision-making. It was essential for patients with cystic fibrosis to feel known, heard, and seen by their providers in order to feel the care was effective. Finally, critical insights around the need for a balance of in-person and virtual care as well as the need for mental health supports were offered.
conclusionsThe learnings from this study could be translated into practical strategies for improving cystic fibrosis care during the pandemic and beyond. We recommend: (1) a hybrid approach to care moving forward, (2) each patient having a lead physician with others filling in as necessary when scheduling demands, and (3) a reallocation of resources to fund a mental health practitioner position.
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.