Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42840031›Full record

Observational studyFrontiers in public health2026

AI-assisted hierarchical primary care and health equity among older adults with chronic diseases: a matched observational mixed-methods study in China.

Hang Cheng, Li Jia

Abstract readObservational StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Frontiers in public health, 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

2 authors.

Hang ChengSchool of Humanities and Management, Guangdong Medical University, Dongguan, China.
Li JiaSchool of Humanities and Management, Guangdong Medical University, Dongguan, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Population aging and the growing burden of chronic diseases have increased the need for more accessible and equitable primary healthcare. Artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted hierarchical diagnosis and treatment has been increasingly introduced into primary care to support patient guidance, triage, follow-up, referral coordination, and risk warning. However, evidence remains limited on whether AI-enabled primary care is associated with more equitable chronic disease management among older adults. Objective: This study examined the associations between AI-enabled primary care within China's hierarchical medical system and health outcomes among older adults with chronic diseases. It further assessed whether these associations differed across income, education, and digital literacy groups, and whether health information acquisition and medical service accessibility were plausible pathways linking AI-enabled care to patient outcomes. Methods: A multicenter, institution-based, matched observational mixed-methods study was conducted in Guangdong Province, China. The analytic sample included 420 older adults with chronic diseases, including 210 patients recruited from AI-enabled primary healthcare institutions and 210 from matched comparison institutions. Multivariable regression models, subgroup analyses, interaction tests, exploratory pathway analyses, and robustness checks were used to examine associations between AI exposure and chronic disease control, self-rated health, and hospitalization-related outcomes. Semi-structured interviews with 48 medical staff and institutional managers were analyzed to contextualize the quantitative findings and to better understand how AI-enabled services were implemented in routine primary care. Results: Compared with patients in comparison institutions, patients in AI-enabled institutions showed a higher chronic disease control rate, better self-rated health, and lower hospitalization risk. Adjusted regression results indicated that institutional AI access was positively associated with chronic disease control (OR = 1.69, 95% CI: 1.12-2.56) and self-rated health (β = 0.24, 95% CI: 0.08-0.39), and negatively associated with hospitalization (OR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.39-0.99). Subgroup analyses suggested that these associations were more evident among low-income and low-education patients, whereas digital literacy remained an important boundary condition. Exploratory pathway analyses showed that health information acquisition and medical service accessibility partly explained the observed associations between AI-enabled care and patient outcomes. Qualitative findings further suggested that AI-supported routine follow-up and patient guidance, but that older adults with low digital literacy often required staff-mediated assistance to benefit from AI-enabled services. Conclusion: AI-enabled primary care within China's hierarchical medical system was associated with better chronic disease management outcomes among older adults in this matched observational study. The findings suggest that AI-enabled primary care may have equity-relevant associations when accompanied by better health information acquisition, service accessibility, follow-up, and referral coordination. These associations should not be interpreted as causal relationships. Their potential equity relevance depends on whether AI tools are integrated into primary care workflows and supported by inclusive, human-assisted service models for older adults with limited digital literacy.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceHealth EquityPrimary Health CareAgedAged, 80 and overChinaChronic DiseaseDigital HealthFemaleHumansMaleartificial intelligencechronic disease managementdigital health literacyhierarchical diagnosis and treatmentmedical service accessibilityprimary healthcare

Identifiers

PMID42840031
PMCPMC13638407

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.