Cited by 223Public Health and Social InequalitiesPrimary Care and Health OutcomesHealth disparities and outcomes

Socio-economic and locational determinants of accessibility and utilization of primary health-care

Field, Ken S., Briggs, David J.·2001·Health & Social Care in the Community

Abstract

Differences in levels of utilization vary and are a function of socio-economic and geographical factors. This paper presents the results of a questionnaire study involving twelve GP practices in Northamptonshire, UK, of factors which affect access and utilization in asthmatics and diabetics; these groups were selected to control for differences in utilization behaviour, as a result of different aetiologies. The questionnaire sought data on: residential location of patients, utilization characteristics of primary health-care, personal circumstances and mobility and hindrances to access and utilization. Key themes were identified relating to age, gender, social class, employment, ethnicity and proximity to the GP surgery. The young, elderly and females report higher rates of utilization, as do nonmanual workers and those who are unemployed. However, accessibility and utilization vary greatly in response to mobility and locational characteristics; these variations tend to be masked by data on overall rates of usage. Optimal scaling techniques were used to investigate the interactions between the factors affecting accessibility and utilization, and to characterize patients in terms of their levels of utilization. Results confirmed that current service provision afforded a differential level of service to patients, which does not directly reflect their level of need.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.0966-0410.2001.00303.x

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Field, K. S., & Briggs, D. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Northampton (GB)
  • Imperial College London (GB)
Venue
Health & Social Care in the Community
Published
2001-09
Volume
9
Issue
5
Pages
294-308
ISSN
0966-0410 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2114370972
Cited by
223
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 12
FWCI
4.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Health & Social Care in the Community (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Repository (Kingston University London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Public Health and Social Inequalities
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Primary Care and Health Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
Keywords
primary care utilization, health care access, socio-economic determinants, place of residence, mobility barriers, asthma, diabetes mellitus, social class, employment status, ethnicity, gender differences, age differences, Northamptonshire
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Asthma, Catchment Area, Health, Community Health Services, Diabetes Mellitus, England, Evaluation Studies as Topic, Female, Geography, Health Services Accessibility, Health Status, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Primary Health Care, Socioeconomic Factors, Transportation, Chi-Square Distribution, Health Care Surveys

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review