ArticlePloS one2026
Driving factors in pediatric emergency department use: an ecological retrospective study.
Article in PloS one, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPediatric emergency departments (PEDs) often face high volumes of low-acuity visits, reflecting gaps in primary care access and socio-economic disparities. We investigated how neighborhood socio-economic vulnerability, pediatrician availability, and proximity to the PED jointly influence PED utilization in Geneva, Switzerland.
methodsIn this retrospective ecological study (Jan 2023-Dec 2024), we aggregated all PED visits for children aged 0-16 years by neighborhood and Canadian Triage Acuity Scale (CTAS) level. Neighborhood visit incidence (unique patients per child population) was modeled using mixed-effects regression against a composite socio-economic vulnerability index (NSVI), pediatrician density within a 2 km radius, and distance to the PED, incorporating an exponential decay function for distance and postal code as a random intercept.
resultsThere were 68,482 PED visits by 35,994 children (35.1% of Geneva under-16 population). Low-acuity visits (CTAS 4-5) comprised ~50% of encounters. Both distance and socio-economic vulnerability showed clear dose-response relationships, with stronger effects observed for lower-acuity visits, and no interaction effect between them. Overall, proximity accounted for up to 20.8% of non-urgent PED use, while neighborhood socio-economic vulnerability explained up to 19.7% of low acuity visits across Geneva. Pediatrician density showed a modest inverse association for low-acuity visits only.
conclusionsBoth proximity and socio-economic vulnerability are independent determinants of non-urgent PED use. Policies focusing only on primary care access risk missing key drivers of PED use, highlighting the need for locally tailored strategies such as community outreach near hospitals or programs to strengthen health literacy among families.
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.