2022
DOI: 10.1186/s12875-021-01587-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

How did general practices organize care during the COVID-19 pandemic: the protocol of the cross-sectional PRICOV-19 study in 38 countries

Abstract: Background General practitioners (GPs) play a crucial role in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic as the first point of contact for possibly infected patients and are responsible for short and long-term follow-up care of the majority of COVID-19 patients. Nonetheless, they experience many barriers to fulfilling this role. The PRICOV-19 study investigates how GP practices in 38 countries are organized during the COVID-19 pandemic to guarantee safe, effective, patient-centered, and equitable … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

5
114
0
2

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 64 publications
(121 citation statements)
references
References 76 publications
(67 reference statements)
5
114
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…However, as the main focus of the study was on the organization of primary care and the reference to wellbeing was not immediately relevant at the outset, the potential impact on wellbeing scores may be less than for other aspects covered by the study/questionnaire. Given the potential volunteer bias and the cross-sectional survey design [10], direct assessment of causal relationships was not possible. We also did not collect information on the actual support measures implemented or the requirements placed on practices; thus, what we reported on was the respondent's perception of support/change.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…However, as the main focus of the study was on the organization of primary care and the reference to wellbeing was not immediately relevant at the outset, the potential impact on wellbeing scores may be less than for other aspects covered by the study/questionnaire. Given the potential volunteer bias and the cross-sectional survey design [10], direct assessment of causal relationships was not possible. We also did not collect information on the actual support measures implemented or the requirements placed on practices; thus, what we reported on was the respondent's perception of support/change.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The questionnaire was developed at Ghent University in multiple phases, including a pilot study among 159 general practices in Flanders (Belgium). More details are described in the protocol [10]. The questionnaire consists of 53 items divided into six topics: (a) infection prevention, (b) patient flow for COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 care, (c) dealing with new knowledge and protocols, (d) communication with patients, (e) collaboration, (f) wellbeing of the respondent, and (g) characteristics of the respondent and the practice.…”
Section: Study Design and Settingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The questionnaire was developed at Ghent University in multiple phases, including a pilot study among 159 practices in Flanders (Belgium). More details are described in the protocol [19]. The questionnaire consisted of 53 items divided into six topics: (a) infection prevention; (b) patient flow for COVID and non-COVID care; (c) dealing with new knowledge and protocols; (d) communication with patients; (e) collaboration; (f) wellbeing of the respondent; and (g) characteristics of the respondent and the practice.…”
Section: Study Design and Settingmentioning
confidence: 99%