ArticleThe Australian journal of rural health2025
Assessing Comparative Dimensions of Access When Accessing Primary Care Across Different Levels of Rurality.
Article in The Australian journal of rural health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Health-Seeking Behaviors After Acute Respiratory Infection Among Urban and Rural Residents and Different Age Groups: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Understanding How Rurality Relates to Residents' Experiences of Accessing Primary Care: An Interview-Based Study.The Australian journal of rural health · 2026Article
- Assessing Comparative Dimensions of Access When Accessing Primary Care Across Different Levels of Rurality.The Australian journal of rural health · 2025Article
- Reconfiguring Care Practices Through Technology-Supported Services: Pathways to Outpatient Satisfaction in Urban and Rural Public Hospitals.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the comparative importance of dimensions of access when accessing primary care across different levels of rurality in Australia.
designA quantitative survey using the paired comparison method.
settingRegional, rural, and remote communities in Queensland, Australia, are defined by the Modified Monash Model classification.
participants3204 households were surveyed, with 192 responses received (6% response rate). After data cleaning, 163 usable surveys were included in the final analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Level of importance for seven dimensions of access: availability, geography, affordability, accommodation, timeliness, acceptability, and awareness.
resultsAwareness was the most important dimension, consistent across all ruralities. Timeliness and availability also ranked highly, though their relative importance varied slightly with the level of rurality. Residents of the regional centre and small rural town ranked timeliness second, while remote and very remote community residents ranked availability second. Geography increased in importance as rurality increased, rising from least important for regional centre residents to mid-level importance for remote and very remote residents. Affordability consistently ranked low in importance across all ruralities.
conclusionThis study reveals differences in the importance of dimensions of access when accessing primary care for residents of regional, rural, and remote Australian communities. These findings suggest that strategies to improve primary care access should be tailored to address the most critical factors across different levels of rurality, focusing on improving awareness, availability, and timeliness of primary care services. The increased importance of geography in the remote and very remote community highlights the need for innovative solutions to overcome geographical barriers for these residents.
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.