MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401746398 · doi:10.1371/journal.pgph.0003406

Changes in reasons for visits to primary care after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic: An international comparative study by the International Consortium of Primary Care Big Data Researchers (INTRePID)

2024· article· en· W4401746398 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Karen Tu, María C. Lapadula, Jemisha Apajee, Valborg Baste, María Sofía Cuba-Fuentes, Simon de Lusignan, Signe Flottorp, Gabriela Gaona, Lay Hoon Goh, Christine Mary Hallinan, Robert Kristiansson, Adrian Laughlin, Zhuo Li, Zheng Ling, Jo‐Anne Manski‐Nankervis, Amy Pui Pui Ng, Luciano F. Scattini, Javier Silva‐Valencia, Wilson D. Pace, Knut‐Arne Wensaas, William Chi Wai Wong, Paula Zingoni, John M. Westfall

Bibliographic record

VenuePLOS Global Public Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsNorth York General HospitalToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchRACGP FoundationNovo NordiskUniversity of TorontoNorwegian Institute of Public HealthSt. Michael's Hospital FoundationPaul Ramsay FoundationQueen's UniversityUniversity of MelbourneUniversity of OxfordPfizerModernaUniversidad Peruana Cayetano HerediaRoyal Australian College of General PractitionersStrykerSeqirusFondation Brain CanadaDiabetes CanadaEli Lilly and CompanyU.S. Department of DefenseSanofiAmgenUniversity of SurreyHeart and Stroke Foundation of CanadaAstraZeneca
KeywordsPandemicMedicineChinaDemographyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Primary careConfidence intervalFamily medicineHealth carePediatricsGeographyPolitical scienceInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has reshaped healthcare delivery worldwide. OBJECTIVE: To explore potential changes in the reasons for visits and modality of care in primary care settings through the International Consortium of Primary Care Big Data Researchers (INTRePID). METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, retrospective study from 2018-2021. We examined visit volume, modality, and reasons for visits to primary care in Argentina, Australia, Canada, China, Peru, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, and the USA. The analysis involved a comparison between the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. RESULTS: There were more than 215 million visits from over 38 million patients during the study period in INTRePID primary care settings. Most INTRePID countries experienced a decline in monthly visit rates during the first year of the pandemic, with rate ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) ranging from RR:0.57 (95%CI:0.49-0.66) to RR:0.90 (95%CI:0.83-0.98), except for in Canada (RR:0.99, 95%CI:0.94-1.05) and Norway (RR:1.00, 95%CI:0.92-1.10), where rates remained stable and in Australia where rates increased (RR:1.19, 95%CI:1.11-1.28). Argentina, China, and Singapore had limited or no adoption of virtual care, whereas the remaining INTRePID countries varied in the extent of virtual care utilization. In Peru, virtual visits accounted for 7.34% (95%CI:7.33%-7.35%) of all interactions in the initial year of the pandemic, dipping to 5.22% (95%CI:5.21%-5.23%) in the subsequent year. However, in Canada 75.30% (95%CI:75.20%-75.40%) of the visits in the first year were virtual, decreasing to 62.77% (95%CI:62.66%-62.88%) in the second year. Diabetes, hypertension and/or hyperlipidemia and general health exams were in the top 10 reasons for visits in 2019 for all countries. Anxiety, depression and/or other mental health related reasons were among the top 10 reasons for virtual visits in all countries that had virtual care. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic resulted in changes in reasons for visits to primary care, with virtual care mitigating visit volume disruptions in many countries.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.282
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.407
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.083 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLOS Global Public HealthSame topicTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationFrench-language works237,207