Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41804752›Full record

ArticleNorth Carolina medical journal2025

Free Clinics in the United States: Challenges, Models, and a Sustainable Alternative Approach.

Jonathan V Emmady, Prabhu Emmady

Abstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in North Carolina medical journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jonathan V EmmadyHope Street Free Clinic, Charlotte, North Carolina.
Prabhu EmmadyHope Street Free Clinic, Charlotte, North Carolina.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Free clinics play a critical role in bridging health care gaps for the uninsured and underserved populations in the United States. Despite various models for funding and sustaining these clinics, many remain constrained by financial dependence, bureaucratic burdens, and eligibility restrictions. This article reviews the necessity of free clinics, their impact on individual and community health, and the limitations of conventional models. It presents a sustainable alternative: a model that operates without county or state funding, does not solicit donations, and eliminates eligibility barriers. By relying on volunteerism and an ethos of unconditional service, such a model maximizes accessibility while minimizing administrative overhead. The discussion includes the long-term impact of free health care access on individuals, families, and communities, and the role of student volunteers in sustaining this mission.

Indexed as

Ambulatory Care FacilitiesHealth Services AccessibilityUncompensated CareAccess to Primary CareHumansMedically UninsuredUnited StatesVolunteersaccess to carecommunity healthfree clinic modelsfree clinicsuninsured

Identifiers

PMID41804752
PMCPMC13368108

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.