Evidence mapPaperPMID 35834301Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2022

Digital Facilitation to Support Patient Access to Web-Based Primary Care Services: Scoping Literature Review.

Brandi Leach, Sarah Parkinson, Evangelos Gkousis, Gary Abel, Helen Atherton, John Campbell, Christopher Clark, Emma Cockcroft, Christine Marriott, Emma Pitchforth and 1 more

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Evolution of the general practice receptionist role and online services: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Understanding access to general practice through the lens of candidacy: a critical review of the literature.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
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

11 authors.

Brandi LeachRAND Europe, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3262-1541
Sarah ParkinsonRAND Europe, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2858-1842
Evangelos GkousisRAND Europe, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8560-8650
Gary AbelUniversity of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2231-5161
Helen AthertonUniversity of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7072-1925
John CampbellUniversity of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6752-3493
Christopher ClarkUniversity of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7526-3038
Emma CockcroftUniversity of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3798-9492
Christine MarriottNational Institute of Health and Care Research Collaboration South West Peninsula Patient Engagement Group, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8450-6222
Emma PitchforthUniversity of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9055-9331
Jon SussexRAND Europe, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8970-4546

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of web-based services within primary care (PC) in the National Health Service in England is increasing, with medically underserved populations being less likely to engage with web-based services than other patient groups. Digital facilitation-referring to a range of processes, procedures, and personnel that seek to support patients in the uptake and use of web-based services-may be a way of addressing these challenges. However, the models and impact of digital facilitation currently in use are unclear.

objectiveThis study aimed to identify, characterize, and differentiate between different approaches to digital facilitation in PC; establish what is known about the effectiveness of different approaches; and understand the enablers of digital facilitation.

methodsAdopting scoping review methodology, we searched academic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) and gray literature published between 2015 and 2020. We conducted snowball searches of reference lists of included articles and articles identified during screening as relevant to digital facilitation, but which did not meet the inclusion criteria because of article type restrictions. Titles and abstracts were independently screened by 2 reviewers. Data from eligible studies were analyzed using a narrative synthesis approach.

resultsA total of 85 publications were included. Most (71/85, 84%) were concerned with digital facilitation approaches targeted at patients (promotion of services, training patients to improve their technical skills, or other guidance and support). Further identified approaches targeted PC staff to help patients (eg, improving staff knowledge of web-based services and enhancing their technical or communication skills). Qualitative evidence suggests that some digital facilitation may be effective in promoting the uptake and use of web-based services by patients (eg, recommendation of web-based services by practice staff and coaching). We found little evidence that providing patients with initial assistance in registering for or accessing web-based services leads to increased long-term use. Few studies have addressed the effects of digital facilitation on health care inequalities. Those that addressed this suggested that providing technical training for patients could be effective, at least in part, in reducing inequalities, although not entirely. Factors affecting the success of digital facilitation include perceptions of the usefulness of the web-based service, trust in the service, patients' trust in providers, the capacity of PC staff, guidelines or regulations supporting facilitation efforts, and staff buy-in and motivation.

conclusionsDigital facilitation has the potential to increase the uptake and use of web-based services by PC patients. Understanding the approaches that are most effective and cost-effective, for whom, and under what circumstances requires further research, including rigorous evaluations of longer-term impacts. As efforts continue to increase the use of web-based services in PC in England and elsewhere, we offer an early typology to inform conceptual development and evaluations.

trial registrationPROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020189019; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=189019.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareState MedicineHumansInternetPrimary Health Caredigital facilitationprimary careweb-based health services

Identifiers

PMID35834301
PMCPMC9335178

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.