Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40467322›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

Investigating changes in user and diagnostic patterns in general practice during the COVID pandemic in 2020: a cohort study using Danish patient data from two consecutive years before and during the pandemic.

Jesper Bo Nielsen, Helene Støttrup Andersen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jesper Bo NielsenResearch Unit for General Practice, University of Southern Denmark Faculty of Health Sciences, Odense, Syddanmark, Denmark jbnielsen@health.sdu.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5764-5462
Helene Støttrup AndersenResearch Unit for General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark Faculty of Health Sciences, Odense, Syddanmark, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe COVID-19 pandemic induced significant changes in access policies to general practice (GP) in most countries. This study aimed to compare and discuss changes in the diagnostic patterns and GP procedures before and during the pandemic. DESIGN AND

settingA register study including data from 11 Danish GP clinics.

participantsEnlisted patients from GP followed 1 year before (February 2019 to January 2020; n=48 650) and 1 year during (April 2020 to March 2021; n=47 207) the COVID-19 pandemic. OUTCOME MEASURES: Diagnostic patterns, consultation type (face-to-face, email and phone), contact persons (GP or GP staff) and patient characteristics.

resultsThe average number of contacts with GP increased from 6.3 contacts per year per patient before the pandemic to 8.3 annual contacts during the pandemic (p<0.01). The proportion of contacts handled face-to-face remained around 53%; however, email contacts more than doubled in number and reached 26% of all contacts during the pandemic. Before the pandemic, GPs handled 36% of all patient contacts. This decreased to 22% during the pandemic, and for some diagnostic groups, the GP staff now handled 90% of the patients. The reduced GP contacts were mainly in email and phone contacts, whereas face-to-face consultations by the GPs seem to have been given priority. No reduction was observed in the absolute number of contacts with diagnoses related to the cardiovascular system or diabetes type 2; however, the proportion of contacts related to skin diseases, upper/lower airway symptoms and preventive care consultations was reduced (p<0.01).

conclusionAlthough these findings cannot prove causality, they demonstrate significant changes in diagnostic patterns, balance between different contact types, and responsible contact persons during the pandemic. Changes mean that it has become a significantly different product that GPs offer their patients. The coming years will show whether these changes remain, whether the quality of treatment and care is the same and whether the changed balance in patient handling (GP or GP staff) is experienced as beneficial by the patients.

Indexed as

COVID-19General PracticePractice Patterns, Physicians'AdolescentAdultAgedCohort StudiesDenmarkFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPandemicsRegistriesSARS-CoV-2Young AdultCOVID-19EPIDEMIOLOGYHealth ServicesPatientsPrimary Health Care

Identifiers

PMID40467322
PMCPMC12142026

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.