ArticleBMC public health2026
Care delay during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany - a cross-sectional online survey in the NAKO study.
Article in BMC 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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
30 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, non-COVID-19 related healthcare utilization declined in Germany, resulting in care delay, including delays and cancellations of routine, chronic, and even acute care. The aim of this study was to investigate factors (i.e. regional differences and participant characteristics) associated with care delay during the pandemic in Germany using a cross-sectional survey.
methodsIn October 2022, a total of 117,466 participants from the German National Cohort (NAKO) study completed an online questionnaire on pandemic-related topics, including care delay during the COVID-19 pandemic. Regional differences and participant characteristics associated with care delay were assessed using (multilevel) logistic regression.
resultsOne third of participants reported having experienced care delay. Care delay did not differ across the 13 federal states or 32 districts in Germany for which sufficient data were available. In the medical practice setting, care delay was nearly equally provider- and patient-related and was reported mostly for routine check-ups. In the hospital setting, care delay was predominantly provider-related and reported for newly occurring conditions. The odds for care delay were higher in females vs. males (odds ratio (OR): 1.30; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.27–1.34), and in participants with vs. without chronic conditions (e.g. mental disorders, OR: 1.41, 95%CI: 1.36–1.46 or cardiovascular diseases, OR: 1.20 95%CI: 1.16–1.24) and decreased with age (e.g. 70 + vs. 50–59 years, OR: 0.59, 95%CI: 0.57–0.62).
conclusionCare delay during the COVID-19 pandemic depended on participant characteristics including age, sex, and preexisting chronic conditions but not on regional (i.e. state and district-level) differences in Germany.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.