Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40604407›Full record

SynthesisBMC primary care2025

Access or continuity: a zero sum game? A systematic review of the literature examining the relationship between access and continuity in primary healthcare.

Mhorag Goff, Ali Hindi, Jonathan Hammond, Sally Jacobs

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC primary care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Teamwork and relational infrastructure: a qualitative study of modern UK general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Why has continuity of general practitioner care been neglected?International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

4 authors.

Mhorag GoffUniversity of Manchester, Manchester, UK. mhorag.goff@manchester.ac.uk.
Ali HindiUniversity of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Jonathan HammondUniversity of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Sally JacobsUniversity of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Funding

Health Foundation Do the organisational and workforce developments associated with the introduction of primary care networks (PCNs) affect patients' experience of continuity of care?National Institute for Health and Care Research Policy Research Unit in Health and Social Care Systems and Commissioning
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn recent years there has been a policy drive in the UK to improve patients' access to appointments in primary care. However, the focus on timely access could undermine continuity of care. This paper aims to investigate how continuity of care and access to care are interrelated and their relative importance for patients and healthcare professionals.

methodsA systematic review was conducted using six academic databases (EMBASE, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL and PsycINFO). Reference lists of included studies and Google Scholar were searched for additional papers. Included were peer-reviewed journal articles in English based on studies in primary care settings from any country, publication date and study design, based on data from any stakeholders. Conference abstracts, opinion papers, reports and literature reviews, studies in secondary or tertiary care or continuity between healthcare settings and studies about development of instruments to measure continuity of care or examining outcomes only were excluded. Fifty-six papers were identified for inclusion in the review. Studies presented differing perspectives on continuity and access, conceptualisations of access and continuity, and, measures used. We conducted thematic analysis of the literature and used Haggerty et al.'s (2003) conceptualization of continuity and Boyle et al.'s (2020) conceptualization of access to synthesise the data.

findingsThemes arising were: system-level, practice-level and patient-level factors that influence access and continuity of care, what is important to patients, and how providers can support access and continuity of care. We found that 'choice of access' has the strongest relationship with relational continuity, however, 'physical access', or the ability to get and 'attend' an appointment, supersedes other dimensions of access as necessary but not sufficient for continuity of care.

conclusionsOur synthesis provides evidence that experiencing continuity depend on the combination of patients' demographic characteristics and health conditions, with situational circumstances, including characteristics of the health system and provider, which are more or less changeable. We propose a theoretical framing of the relationships between the dimensions of access and continuity. It can support policymakers and providers in understanding how to balance providing both access and continuity for patients.

Indexed as

Continuity of Patient CareHealth Services AccessibilityPrimary Health CareHumansUnited KingdomAccessContinuity of carePrimary healthcareSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID40604407
PMCPMC12217832

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.