ArticlePloS one2026
Spatial analysis of accessibility to healthcare-related facilities in Tokyo Metropolis using geographic information systems.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Geographic disparities in access to health services are a growing concern in Japan as population aging and decline increase care needs and as resources concentrate in dense urban cores. Focusing on Tokyo Metropolis as a large and internally heterogeneous urban region, we used geographic information systems to evaluate spatial proximity to healthcare-related facilities-pharmacies, hospitals, clinics, dental clinics, and elderly welfare facilities-together with public transportation infrastructure. For pedestrian access, we calculated population coverage from 400 m to 3200 m Euclidean buffers around each facility. For transportation-related proximity, we calculated the proportion of facilities located within 250 m to 3000 m buffers around public transportation features (bus stops, bus routes, and railway stations). Bus stop-based facility-transportation proximity was consistently high across facility types in both the 23 special wards and the Tama region, whereas railway-station proximity displayed larger spatial variation between areas. Interpreted as an indicator for walkable proximity rather than effective service access, these results highlight where transportation connectivity and facility locations align or diverge. These findings underscore the necessity for healthcare and urban planning strategies that integrate local characteristics with transportation infrastructure.
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.