Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42016290›Full record

ArticleHealth policy OPEN2026

Global health worker visit time variation: A systematic review.

Peter Murphy, Wajeeha Raza, Filip Meheus, Altea Sitruk, Kratu Goel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health policy OPEN, 2026. 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

5 authors.

Peter MurphyCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, United Kingdom.
Wajeeha RazaCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, United Kingdom.
Filip MeheusDepartment of Health Financing and Economics, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Altea SitrukDepartment of Health Financing and Economics, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Kratu GoelDepartment of Health Financing and Economics, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The accurate estimation of the time individuals spend in a health consultation can form a crucial input to measuring diagnostic quality, health workforce planning and costing of services globally. To address this, a systematic review was conducted to identify the length of health care visit times accounting for a range of potential modifiers such as the type of healthcare worker, service delivery platform, and clinical decision-making complexity. Methods: The search for visit times was conducted across seven databases and included approaches to capture the relevant grey literature. Data were extracted, quality appraised, and synthesised using Findings: The search identified 422 studies for inclusion. The average visit time excluding procedures was 19.2 min (95% CI: 16.7-21.6 min) and showed variation across country income classification, region, service delivery platform, health worker and the use of telemedicine. The Interpretation: The estimated variation in visit times can help form part of the evidence base to appraise global health systems, inform health workforce planning, and for costing of services globally. Despite the identified evidence, more research is required to fill the considerable evidence gaps of visit times in lower-income countries as 80% of the studies informing the results come from high income and upper-middle income countries.

Indexed as

ConsultationDurationMeta-regressionSystematic reviewVisit

Identifiers

PMID42016290
PMCPMC13092665

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.