Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40520769›Full record

ArticleJournal of the economics of ageing2025

COVID-19 and domiciliary care utilisation: Evidence from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing.

Anastasia Arabadzhyan, Nikita Jacob, Panagiotis Kasteridis, Anne Mason, Nigel Rice

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the economics of ageing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Anastasia ArabadzhyanCentre for Health Economics, University of York, UK.
Nikita JacobCentre for Health Economics, University of York, UK.
Panagiotis KasteridisCentre for Health Economics, University of York, UK.
Anne MasonCentre for Health Economics, University of York, UK.
Nigel RiceCentre for Health Economics & Dept of Economics and Related Studies, University of York, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic significantly affected global health and social care, leading to unmet needs, especially among vulnerable groups. Using data from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA), we investigate disruptions in home care for individuals over 50. We evaluate how the pandemic changed home care use at the extensive and intensive margins; the relative risk of reporting unmet need; and access to acute and primary care for different socio-demographic groups. We find decreases in home care use (extensive margin), mostly driven by informal care, which were partially offset by an increase in the amount of care received among those who were using home care during the pandemic (intensive margin). However, the relative risk of reporting unmet need rose, particularly among ethnic minorities, individuals with musculoskeletal and mental health conditions, and those not in work or retirement (due to long-term sickness or disability, home or family responsibilities, or unemployment). Individuals living alone and those aged 50-59 faced higher unmet needs for home care, but maintained primary care access as opposed to their counterparts. Our findings suggest that while aiming to protect the most vulnerable groups, pandemic containment policies negatively affected access to vital health and social care services, thereby increasing unmet care needs and exacerbating existing inequalities.

Indexed as

COVID-19 pandemicHome careInequalityMultinomial logit

Identifiers

PMID40520769
PMCPMC12166030

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.