ArticleBMC primary care2026
Timeliness, continuity or travel time: results of a choice-based analysis exploring public preferences for access to primary care in Canada.
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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccess and continuity are two pillars of primary care that are often in tension. While both are important to patients, it is unclear which they prioritize. This study examines public preferences for timeliness, continuity, and travel time to primary care in Canada using a discrete choice experiment.
methodsThe experiment was embedded in a national online survey of adults in Canada. Respondents were randomly assigned to one of four clinical scenarios (worsening depression, new sore throat, new sexually transmitted infection, or worsening diabetes) and completed a discrete choice experiment selecting between two hypothetical primary care options. Each option varied in timeliness (same/next day, 2–7 days, 1 week–1 month), continuity (regular provider, unknown provider with or without access to records), and travel time (≤ 10 min, 10–30 min, > 30 min). We estimated marginal means (MM) to assess attribute preferences and conducted stratified analyses by socio-demographic characteristics. Responses were weighted to be demographically representative of the Canadian population.
resultsWe analyzed data from 9276 survey respondents. All three primary care attributes significantly impacted decision-making, with timeliness and continuity being more important for decision-making than travel time. For example, for depression, 75% of participants (95% CI 73%-77%) opted for healthcare options that offered the quickest appointment, 66% (95% CI 64%-68%) opted for care with their regular clinician, and 56% (95% CI 54%-58%) favored the shortest travel time less than 10 min. Including the third level of each care attribute in a healthcare option significantly reduced the likelihood of selecting that option. Preferences did not vary substantially by socio-demographic characteristics.
conclusionsBoth attributes of access and continuity were consistently prioritized by respondents, with preferences remaining stable across respondent characteristics. Our findings highlight the need for care models that offer timely access with familiar clinicians, or alternatives that maintain informational continuity.
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.