Awareness and utilization of urgent care services among patients attending Al-Wazarat PHCC in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 2020
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Urgent Care Clinics (UCCs) offer unscheduled appointments with a "treat and release" length of visits not exceeding 60 min. The growth of clinics is dictated by patients' demand for quality care that is unscheduled, expedited, and ubiquitous, making them accessible and available. Objectives: This study aimed to assess the patient's level of awareness and utilization pattern of UCCs in Wazarat Health Care Center (WHCC) and assess factors associated with them. Aim: This study aims to provide information contributing to the support of decision-makers about the level of awareness among patients on urgent care services and their pattern of use within primary health care. Methods: This cross-sectional study included 288 patients visiting PHC clinics to measure their level of awareness and pattern of utilization using a self-administered questionnaire. Results: A total of 288 patients participated, 55.99% were females, and the highest percentage was in the age group of 18-38 years at 60.07%. Only one quarter, 73 (25.35%) of the patients were aware of the term urgent clinics, from them, more than a half (53.42%) visited such clinics 1-3 times in the three months before the time of study conduction, and the main cause of the visits was the common cold (25.76%). Less than half of the participants reported visiting the primary clinics without booking an appointment in advance at 44.79%. The reason for this was mainly because of having difficulty booking appointments at 54.55%. Awareness level was the highest (28.32%) among the lowest age group (18-38 years) and decreased gradually by increasing the age. A significantly higher percentage of low educational level participants reported visiting primary clinics without booking an appointment in advance at 51.33% vs. 37.68% of the university and above participants. According to patients ' income, there was a significant (0.023) difference in the awareness level; the highest was among participants with an income of 6000-12000 SAR at 32.86%. Conclusion: Only one-quarter of the studied patients know about the UCCs. More than half of the patients reported visiting these clinics because of difficulties in booking an appointment at the primary healthcare centers and convenience with the services provided at the UCCs. The common cold was the main reason for visiting the UCCs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".