ArticleFamily practice2025
The implementation and evaluation of the Ontario COVID@Home Clinical Primary Care Pathway.
Article in Family practice, 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe COVID@Home Clinical Care Pathway (the Pathway) was developed and implemented as an evidence-based remote monitoring clinical care pathway for the integrated management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the province of Ontario, Canada. We examine its effectiveness and rapid large-scale implementation.
methodsUsing a prospective longitudinal study design, we used electronic medical record clinical data, provider and patient surveys, web analytics, healthcare and provincial utilization, and government holdings data to evaluate reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance outcomes, including patient mortality and health equity.
resultsThe Pathway was widely accessed (19 474 Ontario unique users), contributed 28 816 oxygen saturation monitors, and achieved coverage across income levels and geography. Two-thirds of patients had > 1 encounter, monitored for a median of 4 days (Range: 1-57). Fifty percent of patients had > 1 chronic condition. Patients receiving Pathway care were less likely to die by 0.44% (20/4556), two times lower compared to the total mortality of a population-based representative patient cohort over a parallel time period in Ontario of 0.86% (1820/212 326, P = .0023). Patients were very satisfied with their care, and felt care was accessible, safe, and clear. Providers were very satisfied with the Pathway resources and reported strengthened relationships across the health system.
conclusionsPrimary care (PC) rapidly implemented a clinical care pathway during the COVID-19 crisis. The Pathway demonstrated the beneficial role and effectiveness of PC when patients are provided with timely, accessible, and comprehensive care. Public health responses should explicitly collaborate with PC to address population health.
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.