ArticleBMC primary care2026
Sociodemographic determinants of appointment no-show in primary care: a cross-sectional study in Renca Commune, Chile (2022-2023).
Article in BMC primary care, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNonattendance in primary health care (PHC) is an increasing challenge for health system management, as it leads to wasted resources, greater workloads for healthcare teams, and interruptions in the continuity of care. While most studies have examined this phenomenon in the context of medical specialties, evidence from PHC settings remains scarce. This study aimed to analyze the associations between the sociodemographic and administrative characteristics of appointments at PHC centers within a large urban commune in Santiago, Chile.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted using secondary data from the Rayen Salud® electronic health record system, which consolidates clinical and administrative records from the Electronic Health Records. Appointments scheduled between 2022 and 2023 were extracted, with one appointment per person randomly selected. Appointments with a status of scheduled, canceled, pending, or in progress were excluded, as were overbookings, procedures, minor surgeries, and specialty consultations. The dependent variable was appointment status (completed or not shown). Descriptive statistics and multivariate regression models were used to estimate prevalence ratios (PRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs).
resultsOverall, 21.8% of the appointments were not attended. Nonattendance was more common among adults aged 18–64 years (PR: 1.04; 95% CI: 1.01–1.09), patients affiliated with the public insurance system, and those scheduled via telephone or online platforms (PR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.35–1.47). A higher prevalence was also observed on Saturdays (PR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.33–1.59), after 17:00 h (PR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.13–1.26), and in September (PR: 1.09; 95% CI: 1.00–1.19). With respect to professional health, general practitioners presented the lowest prevalence (PR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.42–0.50), whereas nutritionists, dentists, and psychologists presented higher prevalence (PRs 1.32–1.82). Older adults (≥ 65 years) were more likely to attend (PR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.64–0.71).
conclusionsNo show in PHC represents a major challenge for care delivery. Targeted reminder strategies, particularly for high-risk groups, nonmedical providers, and extended-hour appointments, are essential for improving attendance and strengthening PHC performance.
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.