ArticlePloS one2026
Rural Emergency 360°: A mixed-methods analysis of barriers and priorities for equitable emergency care in Québec.
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRural emergency departments (EDs) are critical to ensuring equitable access to acute care, yet face persistent systemic challenges. In Québec, Canada, reforms to healthcare governance, funding and resource allocation, and service delivery have transformed rural ED operations. This study aimed to document characteristics, challenges, and improvement priorities for all rural EDs in the province.
methodsA participatory mixed-methods design was used. 26 rural EDs in Québec were included. Data sources comprised administrative statistics, structured site surveys, individual stakeholder semi structured interviews, and a validation survey of identified local champions. Analyses comprised a triangulation of the quantitative and qualitative data using transversal thematic analysis to determine common issues. Potential solutions identified were validated through stakeholder questionnaires. The study was reported in accordance with the COREQ reporting guideline.
resultsMost respondents were women (64%) and professionals with more than 5 years of experience. Four main themes were identified: governance, healthcare organization, access to resources, and professional practice. Governance challenges included reduced local autonomy, administrative complexity, and budgeting models poorly adapted to rural realities. Participants emphasized the need for standardized but locally flexible administrative processes, regional emergency service managers, and rural-sensitive performance metrics. Organizational barriers included geographic isolation, limited access to primary care, and difficulties with interfacility transfers due to referral-center capacity and ambulance shortages. Resource constraints centered on shortages of human resources, diagnostic services and specialty coverage, especially anesthesia, obstetrics, and psychiatry. Professional practice was shaped by the need to maintain broad competencies in low-volume contexts, while contending with professional isolation and proximity to patients. Local champions prioritized expanding telemedicine, strengthening prehospital services, enhancing continuing education, and implementing tailored recruitment strategies.
conclusionThis study provides the first province-wide documentation of characteristics, challenges, and improvement priorities for all rural EDs. Findings highlight the need for systemic reforms that restore local decision-making authority, strengthen transfer and prehospital capacity, expand telehealth and specialty access, and support professional development. These results provide a foundation for evidence-based policies and actions to sustain equitable emergency care in rural regions.
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.