Research ArticleResearch

Experiences and preferences of people without access to primary care

Results from a national cross-sectional survey in Canada

Alexander Gabinet-Equihua, Maryam Daneshvarfard, Ri Wang, Alexander Beyer, Danielle Martin, Amanda Condon, Alan Katz, Lindsay Hedden, Danielle Brown-Shreves, Jasmin Kay, Peter MacLeod, Clifton van der Linden and Tara Kiran
Canadian Family Physician November/December 2025; 71 (11-12) 730-739; DOI: https://doi.org/10.46747/cfp.711112730

Abstract

Objective To understand the health care–seeking behaviour and preferences of people in Canada who report not having a primary care clinician (PCC; family doctor or nurse practitioner).

Design An anonymous, online, national cross-sectional survey was conducted. It was available from September 2022 to October 2022 in English and French. Responses were weighted based on sociodemographic factors to approximate the population of Canada.

Setting Canada.

Participants People aged 18 years or older.

Main outcome measures Characteristics, health care–seeking behaviour, and preferences of people without a primary care clinician compared to people with one.

Results A total of 9279 completed surveys were analyzed. About 21.8% of respondents said they did not have a primary care clinician. Among these, 83.1% said they were trying to find one and 66.2% of those looking reported doing so for over 1 year. Fewer men (vs women) (78.0% vs 89.3%; P<.001) and people without supplementary health benefits (vs with) (72.1% vs 85.8%; P<.001) reported looking. More people without a primary care clinician (vs with) indicated they tried getting care from a walk-in clinic (71.8% vs 41.2%; P<.001), but fewer reported their needs being met (40.6% vs 55.3%; P<.001). More people without a primary care clinician responded favourably to potential team- and neighbourhood-based care reforms.

Conclusion People without a regular family doctor or nurse practitioner face several challenges. Many are trying to find one, but cannot. They value relationship-based care yet are more likely to use walk-in clinics and less likely to be satisfied with that care compared to people with a primary care clinician. Reforms should align with the values and preferences of those without primary care.

Primary care is the bedrock of an effective health care system, and greater continuity of care is strongly associated with better health outcomes and lower costs.1-3 Before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, 14.5% of Canadians aged 12 or older reported not having a regular primary care clinician (PCC).4 Workforce and education trends suggest the situation is worsening, with more family doctors retiring,5-7 fewer family doctors offering comprehensive care,6,8 and fewer medical students choosing family medicine.9

Relatively little is known about those without a PCC. Existing research, mostly completed before the pandemic and in Ontario, suggests those without primary care are more likely to be male and younger,4 may visit walk-in clinics more frequently,10,11 and may receive less routine care.10 National data on how long these individuals have been without care, how they are looking for a clinician, and their use of other health services are lacking. Given that universal attachment is a goal of high-performing health systems,12 reforms should prioritize the perspectives of people without primary care. More research is needed to know what is important for them and whether this differs from the rest of the population.

OurCare is a national initiative to inform health care policy decisions by documenting Canadians’ experiences, values, and preferences as they relate to primary care. Phase 1 consisted of a national cross-sectional online survey in 2022 to understand adults’ experiences with and preferences for primary care. Initial results showed that 22.0% of respondents did not have a PCC. There was marked regional variation, from 12.6% in Ontario to 31.0% in Quebec.13 In this paper, we specifically examine the results of people who reported not having a family doctor or nurse practitioner to better understand their health care–seeking behaviour and preferences for system reform.

METHODS

Setting

There are 40 million people in Canada14 dispersed over a large geography, with 17.8% living in rural areas.15 Medically necessary hospital and physician services are covered through provincial and territorial health insurance plans, with each province and territory responsible for health care delivery.

Study design and population

We conducted an anonymous, online, national cross-sectional survey to understand people’s experiences and perspectives regarding primary care. The survey was available in English and French between September 20, 2022, and October 25, 2022, and open to all people in Canada aged 18 years or older. Research ethics board approval was granted by Unity Health Toronto in Ontario (Approval 22-143).

Survey methods

Our survey methods have been described in detail13 previously and are summarized here. A voluntary survey was hosted on Qualtrics and distributed using open and closed links. The former was shared via partner organizations, media coverage, social media, and the OurCare website (https://www.ourcare.ca), while the latter was sent to 122,053 people on the proprietary panel of Vox Pop Labs (https://www.voxpoplabs.com), a national public opinion firm. The survey was designed by our multidisciplinary team of PCCs, researchers, administrators, policy-makers, patients, survey methodologists, and a patient education expert. Its content, usability, and technical functionality were tested by patient advisers, members of the proprietary panel, the research team, and Vox Pop Labs. A total of 79 multiple-choice, open-text, and conditional questions were displayed across 20 web pages, with an estimated completion time of 15 minutes.

Exposure and outcomes

In this paper, we focus on the responses of people who answered “no” to the first survey question: “Do you currently have a family doctor or nurse practitioner that you can talk to when you need care or advice about your health?” Where relevant, we compare their responses to people who responded “yes.” We assessed the former’s sociodemographic characteristics, whether they said they were trying to find a PCC, their reported health care–seeking behaviour (including experiences with walk-in clinics), the primary care attributes they thought were most important, and their preferences about reorganizing primary care.

Statistical analysis

As described previously, incomplete surveys and those finished too quickly were excluded.13 To approximate the Canadian population, responses were weighted based on age, gender, income, education, language, and region using iterative proportional fitting based on marginal distributions derived from the 2021 Statistics Canada Census.16 Outliers were addressed by pruning weights to their 99th percentiles. All reported analyses use weighted data. P values were calculated using logistic regression for multiple comparisons and Rao-Scott Embedded Image tests with second order correction for single comparisons. Statistical analyses used R version 4.0.0, with significance set at a P value less than .05.

RESULTS

We analyzed data for 9279 respondents (5.9% response rate for closed links). Overall, 21.8% reported not having a family doctor or nurse practitioner (ie, PCC). Among these, 54.6% were men, 27.0% were aged 18 to 29 years, 32.9% were from Quebec, 41.3% had high school education or lower, and 39.5% reported having very good or excellent health. Table 1 is a comparison of the demographic characteristics of people who responded “yes” versus “no” to having a PCC, and excludes those who responded “don’t know.” When asked about the last time they had a PCC, 24.8% indicated within 1 year, 67.9% more than 1 year ago, and 5.8% never.

View this table:
Table 1.

Sociodemographic characteristics of respondents after weighting by whether they reported having a primary care clinician and excluded those who reported “don’t know”

Looking status

Approximately 83.1% of people without a PCC said they were currently trying to find one. Fewer men (vs women) (78.0% vs 89.3%; P<.001) and people without supplementary health benefits (vs with) (72.1% vs 85.8%; P<.001) reported looking for a PCC (Table 2). Among respondents trying to find a new PCC, 33.8% reported looking for less than 1 year, 54.0% for 1 to 5 years, and 12.3% for more than 6 years. Commonly reported strategies to find a clinician included using a government agency or service that website or directory (56.5%), talking to a family member (48.3%), and talking to a friend (45.9%) (Figure 1, multiple selections allowed). Common reported reasons for not trying to find a clinician included being healthy and not needing a clinician (35.1%), no clinicians accepting patients in their area (30.3%), and being happy getting care from walk-in clinics (27.7%) (Figure 2, multiple selections allowed).

View this table:
Table 2.

Sociodemographic characteristics of people without a primary care clinician after weighting by whether they reported trying to find one

Figure 1.
Figure 1.

Strategies to find a new primary care clinician: As reported by people without a primary care clinician who are looking for an FD or NP. Multiple selections allowed. N=569.

Figure 2.
Figure 2.

Reasons for not trying to find a new primary care clinician: As reported by people without a primary care clinician who are not looking for an FD or NP. Multiple selections allowed. N=115.

Health care–seeking behaviour

About 12.8% of people without a PCC reported having a regular health care provider who was not a family doctor or nurse practitioner. This was most often a specialist (30.6%), pharmacist (16.0%), or nurse (10.5%) (Figure 3, single selection). When asked about the last time that they had a non-urgent health problem that worried them, people without a PCC said they most frequently tried to get care from in-person walk-in clinics (50.3%), virtual walk-in clinics (27.2%), and hospital emergency departments (23.7%) (Figure 4, multiple selections allowed). Notably, among those who sought care, 20.6% reported paying a fee.

Figure 3.
Figure 3.

Regular alternative health care provider: As reported by people without a primary care clinician who said they have a provider who is not a family doctor or nurse practitioner. Single selection. N=80. Providers selected by less than 5% of respondents are not shown.

Figure 4.
Figure 4.

Place of care sought out for most recent worrisome but non-urgent health problem: As reported by people without a primary care clinician. Multiple selections allowed. N=696. Places of care selected by less than 5% of respondents are not shown.

More people without a PCC (vs with) reported trying to get care from a walk-in clinic in the past 12 months (71.8% vs 41.2%; P<.001), and a greater proportion reported 3 or more visits (38.4% vs 11.9%; P<.001). Among those who sought care, visit(s) most frequently happened in-person for those without and with a PCC (71.5% vs 79.8%; P<.001), but the former group more frequently reported virtual visits via a telephone (40.3% vs 28.6%; P<.001), video call (18.7% vs 9.3%; P<.001), and mobile health application (10.6% vs 6.6%; P=.019). Fewer people without a PCC (vs with) reported their needs were mostly or fully met by walk-in clinics (40.6% vs 55.3%; P<.001).

Preferences

Respondents ranked 10 attributes of primary care in terms of importance (Figure 5). The 2 ranked very important most often by people without and with a PCC were “they know me as a person and consider all the factors that affect my health” and “they stand up for me.” All attributes were ranked very important less often by people without a PCC.

Figure 5.
Figure 5.

Primary care attributes ranked very important by people without versus with a primary care clinician: Primary care clinician includes an FD or NP.

Preferences toward potential system reforms are summarized in Figure 6. More people without a PCC (vs with) reported being somewhat or very willing to accept 2 team-based care reforms, but both groups reported being similarly comfortable or very comfortable receiving support from other team members if recommended by their clinician (89.8% vs 89.6%; P=.9). When asked about 3 neighbourhood-based care reforms (ie, coordinating primary care like the public school system), more people without a PCC (vs with) responded favourably. Having 1 personal health record that all health professionals working in the province can see and use when providing care was fairly or very important for most people without and with a PCC (92.1% vs 94.2%; P=.041).

Figure 6.
Figure 6.

Primary care system reforms ranked favourably by people without versus with a primary care clinician: Primary care clinician includes an FD or NP. Favourably includes very willing or somewhat willing; very comfortable or comfortable; strongly agree or somewhat agree.

DISCUSSION

Decades of research has shown that people who have ongoing access to primary care are more healthy, live longer, and use the health care system less often.1-3 Yet more than 1 in 5 people in Canada report not having a family doctor or nurse practitioner they can talk to when they need care or advice.13 Results from our large national survey of more than 9000 people provide important insights into the characteristics, health care use, and perspectives of those without a PCC.13 Most are actively trying to find a clinician and among those, nearly two-thirds have been looking for over 1 year. They value relationship-based care yet are turning to walk-in clinics and emergency departments for non-urgent concerns. This group uses walk-in clinics more often but are less likely to report this care meets their needs compared to those with a PCC. Unsurprisingly, people without a PCC were more open to potential system reforms, including team- and neighbourhood-based care.

Our findings are consistent with other research and reports showing an increase in the percentage of people in Canada without access to primary care since the COVID-19 pandemic was declared in March 2020.4,17 Among those looking for a PCC, more than half reported using a government agency or service that matches them to one. Centralized waiting lists are used in several regions and are theoretically an efficient way of matching supply with demand, but anecdotally wait times can extend to years, particularly in rural areas.18,19 Our findings are in line with these anecdotes—nearly two-thirds of respondents looking for a PCC said they had tried for over 1 year. Clinician supply has been cited as a major bottleneck, and without reforms the situation is unlikely to improve.20

We found that almost three-quarters of people without a PCC tried getting care from a walk-in clinic in the past year, with more than one-third reporting 3 or more visits. A comparison to prepandemic figures suggests that the proportion of people without a PCC who use walk-in clinics has increased.10 Unfortunately, these episodic visits can be associated with less preventive care, fragmentation of care, and higher system costs.21-23 We also found that approximately one-quarter of respondents used an emergency department for a non-urgent concern, placing increased demand on a setting already strained from high patient volumes and overcrowding.24,25 Similar to walk-in clinics, emergency departments are not designed to meet ongoing care needs such as chronic condition management or coordination of follow-up tests and referrals.

People without a PCC (vs with) reported more walk-in clinic visits, but were less likely to report their needs were met. All respondents highly valued relationship-based care, but people without a family doctor or nurse practitioner are likely obligated to use walk-in clinics for non-urgent concerns, while those with access to primary care have been shown to use them selectively for acute issues.26 Many government-led health system reforms to improve access to primary care have focused on episodic care solutions, such as opening more urgent care centres27 and supporting for-profit virtual walk-in clinics28; these approaches run contrary not only to what the literature shows about the benefits of continuity of care,1-3 but also to what our results suggest the public wants.

System reform is direly needed, and this is the first study to report on the preferences of people in Canada without a PCC. Team-based primary care can increase capacity, improve quality, and reduce costs.29,30 Several countries with strong primary care attachment facilitate or automate access to clinicians or clinics based on geography,31 similar to the neighbourhood-based public-school model in Canada. People without a PCC were more likely to respond favourably to similar proposals in our survey. Panels of representative residents in Ontario and British Columbia, convened as part of the OurCare initiative, also recommended pursuing a public-school inspired model for primary care.32,33

Limitations

Although we weighted responses to mimic the population of Canada, our study’s largest limitation is potential response bias. There were few responses from those who are low income, racialized, and foreign born, as well as from those whose primary language was not English or French. There were no complete responses from residents of the territories. These are groups known to have disparate access to health care. The survey was only available online in English or French. Questions to assess the rationale underlying respondents’ preferences were not included.

Conclusion

People without a regular family doctor or nurse practitioner face several challenges. Many are trying to find one, but cannot. They value relationship-based care, yet are more likely to use walk-in clinics and are less likely to be satisfied with that care compared to people with a PCC. We urgently need reforms that guarantee longitudinal, person-centred primary care for all people in Canada.

Acknowledgment

We thank OurCare primary care regional leaders and our collaborators on our National Health Policy and Health System Governance Group and Primary Care Leaders Circle, members of the Canadian Medical Association’s Patient Voice Advisory Group, and the Improving Primary Care Public Advisors Council at Unity Health Toronto for their help informing the study design and survey questions, interpreting results, and promoting the survey. We also thank Amy Craig-Neil for her support early in the project, Katrina Grieve for help simplifying the survey language, and Paul Krueger for feedback on the survey design. This study received funding from the Staples Canada Even the Odds campaign and the Max Bell Foundation. The opinions, results and conclusions reported in this paper are those of the authors and are independent from the funding sources. Dr Tara Kiran is the Fidani Chair in Improvement and Innovation at the University of Toronto in Ontario and is also supported as a Clinician Scientist by the Department of Family and Community Medicine at the University of Toronto and at St Michael’s Hospital in Toronto, Ont.

Footnotes

  • Contributors

    Dr Tara Kiran, Dr Alexander Gabinet-Equihua, and Maryam Daneshvarfard conceived of and designed the study together. Ri Wang, Dr Clifton van der Linden, Dr Alexander Beyer, and Dr Gabinet-Equihua conducted the analysis. All authors helped interpret the data. Drs Kiran and Gabinet-Equihua drafted the manuscript, and all authors critically reviewed it. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

  • Competing interests

    Dr Amanda Condon is a member of the College of Family Physicians of Canada Board of Directors.

  • This article has been peer reviewed.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Starfield B,
    2. Shi L,
    3. Macinko J.
    Contribution of primary care to health systems and health. Milbank Q. 2005;83(3):457-502. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2005.00409.x.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.
    1. Pereira Gray DJ,
    2. Sidaway-Lee K,
    3. White E,
    4. Thorne A, et al.
    Continuity of care with doctors-a matter of life and death? A systematic review of continuity of care and mortality. BMJ Open. 2018 Jun 28;8(6):e021161. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-021161.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    1. Alberta Medical Association
    . Evidence summary: the benefits of relational continuity [Internet]. Alberta Medical Association; 2025 [cited 2024 Jan 10]. Available from: https://www.albertadoctors.org/resource-centre/relational-continuity-resources/evidence-summary-the-benefits-of-relational-continuity/.
  4. 4.↵
    1. Statistics Canada
    . Health Fact Sheets: Primary health care providers, 2019 [Internet]. Government of Canada; 2020 Oct 22 [cited 2024 Jan 10]. Available from: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/82-625-x/2020001/article/00004-eng.htm.
  5. 5.↵
    1. Kiran T,
    2. Wang R,
    3. Handford C,
    4. Laraya N, et al.
    Family physician practice patterns during COVID-19 and future intentions: Cross-sectional survey in Ontario, Canada. Can Fam Physician. 2022 Nov;68(11):836-46. doi: 10.46747/cfp.6811836.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Premji K,
    2. Green ME,
    3. Glazier RH,
    4. Khan S, et al.
    Characteristics of patients attached to near-retirement family physicians: a population-based serial cross-sectional study in Ontario, Canada. BMJ Open. 2023 Dec 7;13(12):e074120. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-074120.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Ontario College of Family Physicians
    . A profession in crisis: The survival of family medicine in Ontario [Internet]. Ontario College of Family Physicians; 2023 May 31 [cited 2024 Jan 10]. Available from: https://ontariofamilyphysicians.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/ocfp_member_survey_report_2023_05.pdf.
  8. 8.↵
    1. Oandasan IF,
    2. Archibald D,
    3. Authier L,
    4. Lawrence K, et al.
    Future practice of comprehensive care: Practice intentions of exiting family medicine residents in Canada. Can Fam Physician. 2018 Jul;64(7):520-8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. 9.↵
    1. CaRMS
    . R-1 data and reports: 2023 CaRMS forum [Internet]. CaRMS; 2023 [cited 2024 Jan 10]. Available from: https://www.carms.ca/data-reports/r1-data-reports/.
  10. 10.↵
    1. Hay C,
    2. Pacey M,
    3. Bains N,
    4. Ardal S.
    Understanding the Unattached Population in Ontario: Evidence from the Primary Care Access Survey (PCAS). Healthc Policy. 2010 Nov;6(2):33-47.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Schoen C,
    2. Osborn R,
    3. Huynh PT,
    4. Doty M, et al.
    Primary care and health system performance: adults’ experiences in five countries. Health Aff (Millwood). 2004 Jul-Dec;Suppl Web Exclusives:W4-487-503. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.w4.487.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    1. Jahangir YT,
    2. Neiterman E,
    3. Janes C,
    4. Meyer S.
    Healthcare access, quality of care and efficiency as healthcare performance measure: A Canadian health service view. J Health Soc Sci. May 2020;5(3):309-16. doi:10.19204/2020/hlth2.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  13. 13.↵
    1. Kiran T,
    2. Daneshvarfard M,
    3. Wang R,
    4. Beyer A, et al.
    Public experiences and perspectives of primary care in Canada: results from a cross-sectional survey. CMAJ. 2024 May 20;196(19):E646-56. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.231372.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. 14.↵
    1. Statistics Canada
    . Population and demography statistics [Internet]. Government of Canada; 2025 Jul 15 [cited 2024 Jan 10]. Available from: https://www.statcan.gc.ca/en/subjects-start/population_and_demography.
  15. 15.↵
    1. Statistics Canada
    . Population growth in Canada’s rural areas, 2016 to 2021 [Internet]. Government of Canada; 2022 Feb 9 [cited 2024 Jan 10]. Available from: https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2021/as-sa/98-200-x/2021002/98-200-x2021002-eng.cfm.
  16. 16.↵
    1. Statistics Canada
    . Census profile, 2021 census of population. Government of Canada; 2023 [cited 2025 Sep 22]. Available from: https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2021/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E.
  17. 17.↵
    1. Ontario College of Family Physicians
    . Background: INSPIRE-PHC research findings for Ontario [Internet]. Ontario College of Family Physicians; 2023 Apr [cited 2024 Jan 10]. Available from: https://ontariofamilyphysicians.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/backgrounder-research-findings-april-2023.pdf.
  18. 18.↵
    1. Breton M,
    2. Smithman MA,
    3. Brousselle A,
    4. Loignon C, et al.
    Assessing the performance of centralized waiting lists for patients without a regular family physician using clinical-administrative data. BMC Fam Pract. 2017 Jan 5;18(1):1. doi: 10.1186/s12875-016-0573-1.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Gollom M.
    Thousands of Canadians are on doctor wait-lists. Are they effective? CBC News [Internet]. 2024 May 11 [cited 2024 May 21]. Available from: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/doctor-wait-lists-patients-1.7199181?cmp=rss.
  20. 20.↵
    1. Breton M,
    2. Wong ST,
    3. Smithman MA,
    4. Kreindler S, et al.
    Centralized Waiting Lists for Unattached Patients in Primary Care: Learning from an Intervention Implemented in Seven Canadian Provinces. Healthc Policy. 2018 May;13(4):65-82. doi: 10.12927/hcpol.2018.25555.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    Erratum in: Healthc Policy. 2018 Aug;14(1):10. doi: 10.12927/hcpol.2018.25553.
  21. 21.↵
    1. Dorn SD.
    Backslide or forward progress? Virtual care at U.S. healthcare systems beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. NPJ Digit Med. 2021 Jan 8;4(1):6. doi: 10.1038/s41746-020-00379-z.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.
    1. Lofters A,
    2. Salahub C,
    3. Austin PC,
    4. Bai L, et al.
    Up-to-date on cancer screening among Ontario patients seen by walk-in clinic physicians: A retrospective cohort study. Prev Med. 2023 Jul;172:107537. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2023.107537. Epub 2023 May 6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Jones M.
    Walk-in primary medical care centres: lessons from Canada. BMJ. 2000 Oct 14;321(7266):928-31. doi: 10.1136/bmj.321.7266.928.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    1. Canada’s Drug and Health Technology Agency
    . CADTH Health Technology Review. Emergency department overcrowding: Utilization analysis [Internet]. Canada’s Drug and Health Technology Agency; 2023 Nov [cited 2024 May 30]. Available from; https://www.cadth.ca/sites/default/files/hta-he/HC0061-ED-Overcrowding-Utilization-Analysis.pdf.
  25. 25.↵
    1. Morley C,
    2. Unwin M,
    3. Peterson GM,
    4. Stankovich J, et al.
    Emergency department crowding: A systematic review of causes, consequences and solutions. PLoS One. 2018 Aug 30;13(8):e0203316. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0203316.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Lapointe-Shaw L,
    2. Kiran T,
    3. Salahub C,
    4. Austin PC, et al.
    Walk-in clinic patient characteristics and utilization patterns in Ontario, Canada: a cross-sectional study. CMAJ Open. 2023 Apr 25;11(2):E345-56. doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20220095.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. 27.↵
    1. McCracken MA,
    2. Cooper IR,
    3. Hamilton MA,
    4. Klimas J, et al.
    Access to episodic primary care: a cross-sectional comparison of walk-in clinics and urgent primary care centers in British Columbia. Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2023 Nov 28;24:e66. doi: 10.1017/S1463423623000580.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Matthewman S,
    2. Spencer S,
    3. Lavergne MR,
    4. McCracken RK, et al.
    An Environmental Scan of Virtual “Walk-In” Clinics in Canada: Comparative Study. J Med Internet Res. 2021 Jun 11;23(6):e27259. doi: 10.2196/27259.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. Bodenheimer T.
    Revitalizing Primary Care, Part 2: Hopes for the Future. Ann Fam Med. 2022 Sep-Oct;20(5):469-78. doi: 10.1370/afm.2859.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  30. 30.↵
    1. Reiss-Brennan B,
    2. Brunisholz KD,
    3. Dredge C,
    4. Briot P, et al.
    Association of Integrated Team-Based Care With Health Care Quality, Utilization, and Cost. JAMA. 2016 Aug 23-30;316(8):826-34. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.11232.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. 31.↵
    1. Shahaed H,
    2. Glazier RH,
    3. Anderson M,
    4. Barbazza E, et al.
    Primary care for all: lessons for Canada from peer countries with high primary care attachment. CMAJ. 2023 Dec 3;195(47):E1628-E36. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.221824.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  32. 32.↵
    1. OurCare
    . British Columbia priorities panel on primary care: New perspectives and possibilities for primary Care in Canada. A report written by members of the public [Internet]. MAP Centre for Urban Health Solutions; 2023 [cited 2024 May 30]. Available from: https://issuu.com/dfcm/docs/ourcare_british_columbia_final_report_sept_19?fr=xKAE9_zU1NQ.
  33. 33.↵
    1. OurCare
    . Ontario priorities panel on primary care: New perspectives and possibilities for primary Care in Canada. A report written by members of the public [Internet]. MAP Centre for Urban Health Solutions; 2023 [cited 2024 May 30]. Available from: https://issuu.com/dfcm/docs/ourcare_ontario_panel_members_report_v2.0_-_2311?fr=xKAE9_zU1NQ.
Back to top

In this issue

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Email Article
Citation Tools
Respond to this article
Experiences and preferences of people without access to primary care
Alexander Gabinet-Equihua, Maryam Daneshvarfard, Ri Wang, Alexander Beyer, Danielle Martin, Amanda Condon, Alan Katz, Lindsay Hedden, Danielle Brown-Shreves, Jasmin Kay, Peter MacLeod, Clifton van der Linden, Tara Kiran
Canadian Family Physician Nov 2025, 71 (11-12) 730-739; DOI: 10.46747/cfp.711112730
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo

Jump to section

Subjects