ArticleBMC health services research2025
Perceptions of primary care patients attending a legal health clinic: a qualitative descriptive 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. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere has been increasing recognition of the relationship between social determinants of health and unmet legal needs, with those living in poverty experiencing higher rates of poor health. Medical-legal partnerships (MLPs) are programs that have been developed to offer legal services within a clinical setting to patients who may typically not be able to access these types of services. The Legal Health Check-Up Clinic was initiated to screen and offer legal supports to patients from a Canadian primary care clinic, situated in a diverse, urban medium-sized city. Previous quantitative analyses found significant changes in overall health status as well as income, housing, and food security. The aim of this study was to evaluate participants’ experiences and satisfaction with the Legal Health Check-Up Clinic.
methodsA qualitative descriptive approach was used and participants from the Legal Health Check-Up Clinic were invited to take part in a one-time, individual interview. Using a thematic analysis approach, each interview was independently coded and then discussed by three researchers, with any differences reconciled by consensus. Coding was iterative with new codes added as relevant ideas emerged from the interviews.
resultsSixteen interviews were conducted. There were two primary themes: Personal Benefits and Challenges experienced by participants, and Program Structural Elements that fostered or impeded program success. Participants welcomed accessing legal support within the primary care environment and became more aware of their rights and options. Some learned they were not eligible for the program and felt provision of other resources would have been helpful. Participants appreciated the program philosophy of recognizing the relationship between health and social needs and offered constructive feedback for areas of improvement, such as provision of translation services and more time with clients.
conclusionsThe Legal Health Check-Up Clinic was helpful for participants in providing referrals, resources, and concrete direction regarding their legal issue. Clarity in screening potential participant eligibility was suggested. Future work related to interprofessional education of legal and health professionals could support the implementation of a stronger patient-centred approach.
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.