Observational studyPloS one2025
A retrospective evaluation of access equity in virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic: A 2-year review and comparison of visits in Ontario, Canada.
Observational study in PloS one, 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.
- Perceptions and use of publicly funded episodic virtual care: Cross-sectional survey data from New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2026Article
- Virtual Care Remuneration Policy and Postdischarge Follow-Up Trends.JAMA network open · 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
backgroundAccess equity has been raised as a fundamental concern with virtual care, both as it was used during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic as well as its future applications within health systems. These concerns have not yet been substantiated with quantifiable data. We conducted a comparison of healthcare utilization and access across all dimensions of the Ontario Marginalization Index between virtual care and in-person care in the province of Ontario.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective observational study using ICES databases in the Province of Ontario between March 14, 2020, and March 13,2022. We identified all virtual and in-person visits using billing codes. All visits were linked to their individual postal dissemination area for which there was census data from the Ontario Marginalization Index. Dissemination areas were divided, according to their categorization within each marginalization dimension, and visit rates were calculated for both populations.
resultsA total of 93,363,194 visits were included as part of the final analysis. Significant differences in virtual healthcare utilization were noted between the most and least marginalized populations within each dimension. This effect was not observed by visits for in-person care. The only exception was that racialized, and newcomer populations had higher virtual care utilization among the most marginalized.
interpretationThis data is the first that uses a large retrospective dataset and seems to confirm concerns for access inequity among the most marginalized populations. These differences much be part of policy considerations for the future of virtual care use.
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.