ArticleBMC health services research2025
Performance of a national primary care chronic disease screening strategy in Chile: a mixed-methods analysis.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe continuous increase in chronic non-communicable diseases requires strengthening primary care preventive strategies. In Chile, preventive health screening is a national strategy focused on identifying adults with risk factors, including hypertension, diabetes, and dyslipidemia, among others. It is broadly implemented in primary care and has associated performance resources.
objectiveTo evaluate the performance of Chile's primary care preventive health screening for adults and describe healthcare professionals' perceptions regarding its implementation.
methodsA parallel convergent mixed-methods study was conducted. The quantitative component employed a retrospective cohort study to assess individuals between 15 and 64 years old who received a preventive health screening in primary care during 2023. Data analysis focused on access and waiting times of the screening pathways. The qualitative component consisted of an online survey to evaluate participants' perceptions of the screening pathways' performance.
resultsA total of 36,207 adult individuals received a preventive health screening during 2023, of which 61.5% were reported as completed. Screenings with the highest completion rates (between 99% and 80.1%) were those performed during the check-up day: high blood pressure, overweight and obesity, alcohol consumption, and smoking. Access to the second and third steps declines abruptly, with rates between 61.4% and 39.3%, including breast and cervical cancer screenings. The lowest access was to dyslipidemia and diabetes mellitus type two screening. Mean waiting times range from 16 to 179 days. The shortest times were from the screening to the first measure of the high blood pressure study and the pap smear test (16 and 18 days, respectively). The longest times were for diagnostic cardiovascular diseases (129 to 179 mean days). Qualitative findings identified that providers perceived that individuals are frequently lost when the screening pathway requires multiple steps, and highlighted the need to develop screening pathway protocols and implement strategies to manage the screening pathway proactively.
conclusionThis is the first evaluation of Chile's preventive health screening, demonstrating high implementation but dramatically low completion rates of diagnostic actions after the screening. The policy urgently needs to ensure active follow-up throughout the diagnostic pathway, which can lead to early diagnosis and prevent avoidable complications of cardiovascular disease and cancer.
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.