ArticleBMC health services research2025
Patients' views on a subsidy card model for gluten-free food access: a qualitative study.
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. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCoeliac disease requires strict adherence to a gluten-free diet to prevent health complications. While gluten-free foods (GFF) are traditionally available on the National Health Service (NHS) prescriptions, the cost and limited product range have prompted consideration of alternatives. Wales is exploring replacing prescriptions with a subsidy card scheme, piloted and implemented by the Hywel Dda University Health Board. This study explores potential service users' views on the advantages and challenges of transitioning to a subsidy card scheme, as well as their priorities as individuals with coeliac disease.
methodsA qualitative study was conducted with 23 participants from six Welsh health boards where the subsidy card scheme has not been implemented. Participants included individuals eligible for GFF prescriptions and carers of eligible individuals. Recruitment was via social media and Coeliac UK's Wales mailing list, with purposive sampling to ensure diversity. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews (April-July 2024) and analysed thematically using NVivo software.
resultsFour themes and 20 subthemes were identified. Participants viewed the subsidy card as offering greater choice, autonomy in dietary management, and convenience compared to prescriptions, with the potential to better align with everyday shopping habits. Concerns centred on the card's monetary value amid inflation, risks of technical or top-up failures, misuse, and limited retailer participation in rural areas. Sixteen participants expressed a clear interest in switching to the subsidy card system, six were ambivalent, and one expressed no interest. Participants also highlighted six key priorities that they felt were essential to improving GFF access and ensuring better support for people with coeliac disease. These priorities included: ease of access, variety and freedom of choice, a tasty and healthy diet, consistency, cost, and better awareness and education of coeliac disease.
conclusionsThe subsidy card model presents a promising, cost-effective, and patient-centred alternative to prescriptions, offering greater dietary autonomy and alignment with consumer practices. However, its success will depend on ensuring equity across geographic areas, addressing infrastructure and retailer participation, safeguarding nutritional adequacy, and maintaining prescription access during transition. Careful implementation will be essential to support diverse patient needs and optimise the scheme's success.
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.