Skip to content
EvidenceHelixEvidenceLib · Scientific Encyclopedia
⌘ K

Scientific library

EvidenceLib encyclopediaAll articles A–Z2,835Open textbooks209Open-access articles1,406Cancer study catalog458How it is made

My workspace this browser

Saved pages0Notes & annotations0

Recently viewed

Explore by field

Cancer and Oncology182Genetics and Genomics170Neuroscience185Cardiovascular Medicine180Immunology142Pharmacology173Molecular Biology161Infectious Diseases150Rare and Inherited Diseases181Clinical Research173Anatomy and Physiology613Drugs and Chemicals621Psychiatry and Psychology185Public Health and Nutrition178Diagnostics and Medical Technology125Respiratory Medicine113Digestive System and Liver91Metabolism and Endocrine Disease177Bones, Joints, Muscles and Skin213Kidney, Urology and Women's Health173Eye, Ear, Nose and Throat55
Plans & pricingCompare EvidenceHelix workspace plans
Library›Open textbooks›Remote and digital services in UK general practice 2021–2023: the Remote by Default 2 longitudinal qualitative study synopsis›References

Continue where you left off ()

Explore more with EvidenceHelix Workspace

Compare studies, analyze evidence and create research reports with premium tools.

Explore Researcher plans

Remote and digital services in UK general practice 2021–2023: the Remote by Default 2 longitudinal qualitative study synopsis · References

References

CC BY 4.0 · National Institute for Health and Care Research · approximately 17 min read

  1. Gkeredakis M, Lifshitz-Assaf H, Barrett M. Crisis as opportunity, disruption and exposure: exploring emergent responses to crisis through digital technology. Inf Organ 2021;31:100344.
  2. Wherton J, Greenhalgh T, Hughes G, Shaw SE. The role of information infrastructures in scaling up video consultations during COVID-19: mixed methods case study into opportunity, disruption, and exposure. J Med Internet Res 2022;24:e42431.36282978
  3. NHS England. Advice on How to Establish a Remote ‘Total Triage’ Model in General Practice Using Online Consultations. London: NHS England; 2020. URL: https://madeinheene.hee.nhs.uk/Portals/0/Advice%20on%20how%20to%20establish%20a%20remote%20total%20triage%20model%20in%20GP%20using%20online%20consultations.pdf (accessed 23 March 2023).
  4. Chappell P, Dias A, Bakhai M, Ledger J, Clarke GM. How is primary care access changing? A retrospective, repeated cross-sectional study of patient-initiated demand at general practices in England using a modern access model, 2019–2022. BMJ Open 2023;13:e072944.
  5. Murphy M, Scott LJ, Salisbury C, Turner A, Scott A, Denholm R, et al. Implementation of remote consulting in UK primary care following the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods longitudinal study. Br J Gen Pract 2021;71:e166–77.33558332
  6. Wherton J, Greenhalgh T, Shaw S. Expanding video consultation services at pace and scale in the COVID-19 pandemic: a national mixed-method case study of Scotland. J Med Internet Res 2021;23:e31374.34516389
  7. Greenhalgh T, Wherton J, Shaw S, Morrison C. Video consultations for COVID-19: an opportunity in a crisis. BMJ 2020;368:m998.32165352
  8. Marshall M, Howe A, Howsam G, Mulholland M, Leach J. COVID-19: a danger and an opportunity for the future of general practice. Br J Gen Pract 2020;70:270–1.32393503
  9. Hancock M. The Future of Healthcare (speech, 30th July). London: Gov.uk; 2020. URL: www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-future-of-healthcare (accessed 12 November 2021).
  10. Vestesson E, De Corte K, Crellin E, Ledger J, Bakhai M, Clarke GM. Consultation rate and mode in English general practice, 2018 to 2022: a population-based study by deprivation. JMIR Public Health Surveill 2023;9:e44944. 10.2196/4494437129943
  11. Greenhalgh T, Shaw SE, Alvarez Nishio A, Byng R, Clarke A, Dakin F, et al. Remote care in UK general practice: baseline data on 11 case studies. NIHR Open Res 2022;2:47.36814638
  12. Moschogianis S, Darley S, Coulson T, Peek N, Cheraghi-Sohi S, Brown BC. Patient experiences of an online consultation system: a qualitative study in English primary care post-COVID-19. Br J Gen Pract 2024;74:e489–97. 10.3399/bjgp.2023.007638164550
  13. Clarke G, Dias A, Wolters A. Access to and delivery of general practice services: a study of patients at practices using digital and online tools. London: Health Foundation; 2022.
  14. Salisbury C, Murphy M, Duncan P. The impact of digital-first consultations on workload in general practice: modeling study. J Med Internet Res 2020;22:e18203.32543441
  15. Campbell JL, Fletcher E, Britten N, Green C, Holt TA, Lattimer V, et al. Telephone triage for management of same-day consultation requests in general practice (the ESTEEM trial): a cluster-randomised controlled trial and cost-consequence analysis. Lancet 2014;384:1859–68.25098487
  16. Turner A, Morris R, Rakhra D, Stevenson F, McDonagh L, Hamilton F, et al. Unintended consequences of online consultations: a qualitative study in UK primary care. Br J Gen Pract 2022;72:e128–37.34903520
  17. Benda NC, Veinot TC, Sieck CJ, Ancker JS. Broadband internet access is a social determinant of health! Am J Public Health 2020;110:1123–5.32639914
  18. Buis LR, Brown LK, Plegue MA, Kadri R, Laurie AR, Guetterman TC, et al. Identifying inequities in video and audio telehealth services for primary care encounters during COVID-19: repeated cross-sectional, observational study. J Med Internet Res 2023;25:e49804.37773609
  19. Husain L, Greenhalgh T, Hughes G, Finlay T, Wherton J. Desperately seeking intersectionality in digital health disparity research: narrative review to inform a richer theorization of multiple disadvantage. J Med Internet Res 2022;24:e42358. 10.2196/4235836383632
  20. McGreevy A, Soley-Bori M, Ashworth M, Wang Y, Rezel-Potts E, Durbaba S, et al. Ethnic inequalities in the impact of COVID-19 on primary care consultations: a time series analysis of 460,084 individuals with multimorbidity in South London. BMC Med 2023;21:26.36658550
  21. Freedman S. Why It’s So Hard to Get a GP Appointment: Substack. 2024. URL: https://samf.substack.com/p/why-its-so-hard-to-get-a-gp-appointment (accessed 12 February 2025).
  22. Rosen R, Wieringa S, Greenhalgh T, Leone C, Rybczynska-Bunt S, Hughes G, et al. Clinical risk in remote consultations in general practice: findings from in-COVID-19 pandemic qualitative research. BJGP Open 2022;6:BJGPO.2021.0204. 10.3399/bjgpo.2021.020435487581
  23. Vestesson E, De Corte K, Chappell P, Crellin E, Clarke GM. Antibiotic prescribing in remote versus face-to-face consultations for acute respiratory infections in primary care in England: an observational study using target maximum likelihood estimation. EClinicalMedicine 2023;64:102245.37842171
  24. Shah M, Barbosa TM, Stack G, Fleming A. Trends in antibiotic prescribing in primary care out-of-hours doctors’ services in Ireland. JAC Antimicrob Resist 2024;6:dlae009.38343625
  25. Duffy SW, de Jonge L, Duffy TE. Effects on cancer prevention from the COVID-19 pandemic. Ann Rev Med 2023;75:1–11.37625124
  26. Morrissey M, Shepherd E, Kinley E, McClatchey K, Pinnock H. Effectiveness and perceptions of using templates in long-term condition reviews: a systematic synthesis of quantitative and qualitative studies. Br J Gen Pract 2021;71:e652–9.33690148
  27. Healthcare Safety Investigations Body. Investigation Report: Continuity of Care: Delayed Diagnosis in GP Practices. London: HSIB; 2023. URL: www.hssib.org.uk/patient-safety-investigations/continuity-of-care-delayed-diagnosis-in-gp-practices/investigation-report/#:~:text=HSSIB%20recommends%20that%20NHS%20England,GP%20practices%20multiple%20times%20with (accessed 12 February 2024).
  28. Parry W, Fraser C, Crellin E, Hughes J, Vestesson E, Clarke GM. Continuity of care and consultation mode in general practice: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study using patient-level and practice-level data from before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in England. BMJ Open 2023;13:e075152.
  29. Leighton C, Cooper A, Porter A, Edwards A, Joseph-Williams N. Effectiveness and safety of asynchronous telemedicine consultations in general practice: systematic review. BJGP Open 2023;8:BJGPO.2023.0177.
  30. Payne R, Clarke A, Swann N, van Dael J, Brenman N, Rosen R, et al. Patient safety in remote primary care encounters: multimethod qualitative study combining Safety I and Safety II analysis. BMJ Qual Saf 2023;33:573–86. 10.1136/bmjqs-2023-016674
  31. Mroz G, Papoutsi C, Greenhalgh T. From ‘A Rapid and Necessary Revolution’ to ‘Telemedicine Killed the PE Teacher’: Changing Representations of Remote GP Consultations in UK Media During the COVID-19 Pandemic. In Lewis M, Govander E, Holland K, editors. Communicating COVID-19. London: Palgrave; 2022.
  32. Mroz G, Papoutsi C, Rushforth A, Greenhalgh T. Changing media depictions of remote consulting in COVID-19: analysis of UK newspapers. Br J Gen Pract 2021;71:e1–9.33318086
  33. NHS England. Updated Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to Support Restoration of General Practice Services. London: NHS England; 2021. URL: www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/B0497-GP-access-letter-May-2021-FINAL.pdf (accessed 16 June 2022).
  34. McKee M, Hiam L, Dorling D. Weakened by a decade of austerity: why the UK’s COVID-19 inquiry is right to look at policies since 2010. BMJ 2023;381:1288. 10.1136/bmj.p128837279988
  35. Hunter DJ. At breaking point or already broken? The National Health Service in the United Kingdom. N Engl J Med 2023;389:100–3.37428450
  36. Royal College of General Practitioners. Fit for the Future: Reshaping General Practice Infrastructure in England. London: RCGP; 2023.
  37. Shaw SE, Hughes G, Wherton J, Moore L, Rosen R, Papoutsi C, et al. Achieving spread, scale up and sustainability of video consulting services during the COVID-19 pandemic? Findings from a comparative case study of policy implementation in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Front Digit Health 2021;3:754319. 10.3389/fdgth.2021.75431934988546
  38. Institute for Government. Delivering a General Practice Estate That Is Fit for Purpose. London: IFG; 2024.
  39. Hutchinson J, Lau YS, Sutton M, Checkland K. How new clinical roles in primary care impact on equitable distribution of workforce: a retrospective study. Br J Gen Pract 2023;73:e659–66.37604700
  40. Dakin F, Rai T, Paparini S, Greenhalgh T. Supporting your support staff during crises: recommendations for practice leaders to develop a relational workplace. BMJ Lead 2023;7:1.1–7. 10.1136/leader-2023-000780
  41. Shembavnekar N, Kelly E, Charlesworth A. How Feasible Are the NHS Long Term Workforce Plan Commitments on Training? London: The Health Foundation; 2023.
  42. Ferreira T, Collins AM. The NHS Long Term Workforce Plan: an ambitious leap or a misstep? J R Soc Med 2023;116:368–70.37698947
  43. Dixon-Woods M, Summers C, Morgan M, Patel K. The future of the NHS depends on its workforce. BMJ 2024;384:e079474. 10.1136/bmj-2024-07947438538029
  44. Wallbank S. How does the NHS workforce plan build confidence in a challenged system? Br J Healthcare Manag 2023;29:212–8.
  45. British Medical Association. Safe Working in General Practice. London: BMA; 2024. URL: https://www.bma.org.uk/advice-and-support/gp-practices/managing-%0Aworkload/safe-working-in-general-practice (accessed 15 February 2024).
  46. Kontopantelis E, Panagioti M, Farragher T, Munford LA, Parisi R, Planner C, et al. Consultation patterns and frequent attenders in UK primary care from 2000 to 2019: a retrospective cohort analysis of consultation events across 845 general practices. BMJ Open 2021;11:e054666.
  47. Armitage R. Pressure on GPs in England: appointments, workforce, and patient complexity. Postgrad Med J 2024;100:866–8. 10.1093/postmj/qgae05038656430
  48. McDermott I, Spooner S, Checkland K. Employment and deployment of additional roles staff in general practice: a realist evaluation of what works for whom, how, and why. Br J Gen Pract 2025;75:e153–8. 10.3399/bjgp.2024.056239609077
  49. McDermott I, Spooner S, Goff M, Gibson J, Dalgarno E, Francetic I, et al. Scale, scope and impact of skill mix change in primary care in England: a mixed-methods study. Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2022;10:1–48.
  50. Greenhalgh T, Thompson P, Weiringa S, Neves AL, Husain L, Dunlop M, et al. What items should be included in an early warning score for remote assessment of suspected COVID-19? Qualitative and Delphi study. BMJ Open 2020;10:e042626.
  51. Greenhalgh T, Koh GCH, Car J. COVID-19: a remote assessment in primary care. BMJ 2020;368:m1182. 10.1136/bmj.m118232213507
  52. Greenhalgh T, Rosen R, Shaw SE, Byng R, Faulkner S, Finlay T, et al. Planning and evaluating remote consultation services: a new conceptual framework incorporating complexity and practical ethics. Front Digit Health 2021;3:726095. 10.3389/fdgth.2021.72609534713199
  53. Wherton J, Greenhalgh T. Evaluation of the Near Me Video Consulting Service in Scotland During COVID-19, 2020. Edinburgh: Scottish Government; 2021. URL: www.gov.scot/binaries/content/documents/govscot/publications/research-and-analysis/2021/03/evaluation-near-video-consulting-service-scotland-during-covid-19-2020-main-report/documents/evaluation-near-video-consulting-service-scotland-during-covid-19-2020/evaluation-near-video-consulting-service-scotland-during-covid-19-2020/govscot%3Adocument/evaluation-near-video-consulting-service-scotland-during-covid-19-2020.pdf (accessed 14 April 2021).
  54. Greenhalgh T, Ladds E, Hughes G, Moore L, Wherton J, Shaw SE, et al. Why do GPs rarely do video consultations? Qualitative study in UK general practice. Br J Gen Pract 2022;72:e351–60. 10.3399/bjgp.2021.065835256385
  55. Van de Ven AH, Polley DE, Garud R, Venkataraman S. The Innovation Journey. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1999.
  56. Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O. Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q 2004;82:581–629. 10.1111/j.0887-378X.2004.00325.x15595944
  57. Greenhalgh T, Wherton J, Papoutsi C, Lynch J, Hughes G, A’Court C, et al. Beyond adoption: a new framework for theorizing and evaluating nonadoption, abandonment, and challenges to the scale-up, spread, and sustainability of health and care technologies. J Med Internet Res 2017;19:e367. 10.2196/jmir.877529092808
  58. Greenhalgh T, Clarke A, Byng R, Dakin F, Faulkner S, Hemmings N, et al. After the disruptive innovation: How remote and digital services were embedded, blended and abandoned in UK general practice – longitudinal study [published online ahead of print June 11 2025]. Health Soc Care Deliv Res 2025. 10.3310/KRWS4334
  59. Institute of Medicine (US). Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2001.
  60. Hollnagel E, Wears RL, Braithwaite J. From Safety-I to Safety-II: A White Paper. The Resilient Health Care Net. Odense, Denmark: University of Southern Denmark; 2015.
  61. Jerak-Zuiderent S. Certain uncertainties: modes of patient safety in healthcare. Soc Stud Sci 2012;42:732–52.23189612
  62. Dixon-Woods M, Cavers D, Agarwal S, Annandale E, Arthur A, Harvey J, et al. Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006;6:1–13.16412232
  63. Dakin FH, Rybczynska-Bunt S, Rosen R, Clarke A, Greenhalgh T. Access and triage in contemporary general practice: a novel theory of digital candidacy. Soc Sci Med 2024;349:116885. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.11688538640742
  64. Archer M. Making Our Way through the World: Human Reflexivity and Social Mobility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007.
  65. Scambler G. Archer and ‘vulnerable fractured reflexivity’: a neglected social determinant of health? Soc Theory Health 2013;11:302–15.
  66. Rybczynska-Bunt S, Byng R, Spitters S, Shaw SE, Jameson B, Greenhalgh T. The reflexive imperative in the digital age: using Archer’s ‘fractured reflexivity’ to theorise widening inequities in UK general practice. Sociol Health Illn 2024;46:1772–91.38922942
  67. Link BG, Phelan J. Social conditions as fundamental causes of disease. J Health Soc Behav 1995;35:80–94.
  68. Delgado R, Stefancic J. Critical Race Theory: An Introduction. New York: NYU Press; 2023.
  69. Phelan JC, Link BG. Is racism a fundamental cause of inequalities in health? Annu Rev Sociol 2015;41:311–30.
  70. Cho S, Crenshaw KW, McCall L. Toward a field of intersectionality studies: theory, applications, and praxis. Signs 2013;38:785–810.
  71. Husain L, Finlay T, Husain A, Wherton J, Hughes G, Greenhalgh T. Developing user personas to capture intersecting dimensions of disadvantage in marginalised older patients: a qualitative study. Br J Gen Pract 2024;74:e250–7.38242714
  72. Ladds E, Greenhalgh T. Modernising continuity: a new conceptual framework. Br J Gen Pract 2023;73:246–8.37230773
  73. Ladds E, Greenhalgh T, Byng R, Rybczynska-Bunt S, Kalin A, Shaw S. A contemporary ontology of continuity in general practice: capturing its multiple essences in a digital age. Soc Sci Med 2023;332:116112.37535988
  74. Haggerty JL, Reid RJ, Freeman GK, Starfield BH, Adair CE, McKendry R. Continuity of care: a multidisciplinary review. BMJ 2003;327:1219–21.14630762
  75. Shi L, Starfield B, Xu J. Validating the adult primary care assessment tool. J Fam Pract 2001;50:161.
  76. Starfield B, Shi L, Macinko J. Contribution of primary care to health systems and health. Milbank Q 2005;83:457–502.16202000
  77. Payne RE, Dakin F, MacIver E, Swann N, Pring T, Clarke A, et al. Challenges to quality in modern, hybrid general practice: A multi-site longitudinal study. Br J Gen Pract 2024;75:e1–11. 10.3399/bjgp.2024.018439117426
  78. Fraser SW, Greenhalgh T. Coping with complexity: educating for capability. BMJ 2001;323:799–803.11588088
  79. Tate A, Ahluwalia S. A pedagogy of the particular – towards training capable GPs. Educ Prim Care 2019;30:198–201.31159684
  80. Brown JS, Duguid P. The Social Life of Information: Updated, with a New Preface. Brighton, MA: Harvard Business Review Press; 2017.
  81. Fenwick T. Sociomateriality in medical practice and learning: attuning to what matters. Med Educ 2014;48:44–52.24330116
  82. Greenhalgh T, Payne R, Hemmings N, Leach H, Hanson I, Khan A, et al. Training needs for staff providing remote services in general practice: a mixed-methods study. Br J Gen Pract 2024;74:e17–26.38154935
  83. Pentland BT, Feldman MS. Designing routines: on the folly of designing artifacts, while hoping for patterns of action. Inf Organ 2008;18:235–50.
  84. Feldman MS, Pentland BT. Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Adm Sci Q 2003;48:94–118.
  85. Gill MJ. The significance of suffering in organizations: understanding variation in workers’ responses to multiple modes of control. Acad Manage Rev 2019;44:377–404.
  86. Ragu-Nathan T, Tarafdar M, Ragu-Nathan BS, Tu Q. The consequences of technostress for end users in organizations: conceptual development and empirical validation. Inf Syst Res 2008;19:417–33.
  87. Edmondson AC, Lei Z. Psychological safety: the history, renaissance, and future of an interpersonal construct. Annu Rev Organ Psychol Organ Behav 2014;1:23–43.
  88. Gittell JH, Logan C, Cronenwett J, Foster TC, Freeman R, Godfrey M, Vidal DC. Impact of relational coordination on staff and patient outcomes in outpatient surgical clinics. Health Care Manage Rev 2020;45:12–20.29303904
  89. Gittell JH. Relational Coordination: Coordinating Work Through Relationships of Shared Goals, Shared Knowledge and Mutual Respect. In Kyriakidou O, Özbilgin MF, editors, Relational Perspectives in Organizational Studies: A Research Companion; Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing; 2006. pp. 74–94.
  90. Maben J, Ball J, Edmondson AC. Workplace Conditions. Elements of Improving Quality and Safety in Healthcare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2023.
  91. Dakin F, Hemmings N, Byng R, Moore L, Ladds E, Payne R, et al. Technostress, suffering and relational strain: the impact of remote and digital work on general practice staff. Br J Gen Pract 2024; 752:e211–21.
  92. Star SL. The ethnography of infrastructure. Am Behav Sci 1999;43:377–91.
  93. Star SL. Infrastructure and ethnographic practice: working on the fringes. Scand J Inf Syst 2002;14:6.
  94. Greenhalgh T, Wherton J, Shaw S, Papoutsi C, Vijayaraghavan S, Stones R. Infrastructure revisited: an ethnographic case study of how health information infrastructure shapes and constrains technological innovation. J Med Internet Res 2019;21:e16093. 10.2196/1609331855184
  95. Greenhalgh T, Shaw SE, Alvarez Nishio A, Booth A, Byng R, Clarke A, et al. Protocol: remote care as the ‘new normal’? Multi-site case study in UK general practice. NIHR Open Res 2022;2:46.37881300
  96. Hughes G, Rybczynska-Bunt S, Shasha’h S, Greene S, Shaw S, Greenhalgh T. Protocol: How can people with social care needs be supported through processes of digital care navigation to access remote primary care? A multi-site case study in UK general practice of remote care as the ‘new normal’. NIHR Open Res 2023;3:17.37881454
  97. Care Quality Commission. The State of Health Care and Adult Social Care in England 2022/23. London: CQC; 2023. URL: www.cqc.org.uk/publications/major-report/state-care/2022-2023 (accessed 12 February 2024).
  98. Care Quality Commission. The State of Health Care and Adult Social Care in England 2021/22. London: CQC; 2022. URL: www.cqc.org.uk/publication/state-care-202122 (accessed 12 February 2024).
  99. NHS England. GP Patient Survey. London: NHS England. URL: www.gp-patient.co.uk (accessed 13 February 2024).
  100. Payne R, Dakin F, MacIver E, Swann N, Pring T, Clarke A, et al. Challenges to quality in contemporary, hybrid general practice: a multi-site longitudinal case study. Br J Gen Pract 2025;75:e1–11. 10.3399/bjgp.2024.018439117426
  101. Marshall M, Pagel C, French C, Utley M, Allwood D, Fulop N, et al. Moving improvement research closer to practice: the Researcher-in-Residence model. BMJ Qual Saf 2014;23:801–5.
  102. Clarke V, Braun V. Thematic analysis. J Posit Psychol 2017;12:297–8.
  103. Czarniawska B. A Narrative Approach to Organization Studies. London: SAGE Publications Ltd; 1997.
  104. Boje D. Narrative Methods for Organizational & Communication Research. London: SAGE; 2001.p.160.
  105. Song K, Hey M, Payne RE. Media depictions of primary care tele-consultation safety: analysis of UK newspapers. Br J Gen Pract 2024;74:e695–701.38621808
  106. Anderson H, Scantlebury A, Galdas P, Adamson J. Remote and technology‐mediated working during the COVID‐19 pandemic: a qualitative exploration of the experiences of nurses working in general practice (the GenCo Study). J Adv Nurs 2023;80:1592–606.37909600
  107. Papoutsi C, Wherton J, Shaw S, Morrison C, Greenhalgh T. Putting the social back into sociotechnical: case studies of co-design in digital health. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2021;28:284–93.33043359
  108. Donaghy E, Huang H, Henderson D, Wang HH, Guthrie B, Mercer SW. Primary care transformation in Scotland: a qualitative study of GPs’ and multidisciplinary team members’ views. Br J Gen Pract 2024;74:e1–8.38154939
  109. Heath L, Ordóñez-Mena JM, Aveyard P, Wherton J, Nicholson BD, Stevens R. How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected the delivery of preventive healthcare? An interrupted time series analysis of adults in English primary care from 2018 to 2022. Prev Med 2024;181:107923.38432306
  110. Dehghani Tafti A, Fatehpanah A, Salmani I, Bahrami MA, Tavangar H, Fallahzadeh H, et al. COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the continuity of care for chronic patients: evidence from a cross-sectional retrospective study in a developing country. BMC Prim Care 2023;24:137.37393225
  111. Rishworth A, King B, Holmes LM. Digital geographies of care: telehealth landscapes of addiction treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic. Health Place 2024;89:103296.38917673
  112. Loukili I, Goedhart NS, Zuiderent-Jerak T, Dedding C. Digitalizing access to care: how self-check-in kiosks shape access to care and efficiency of hospital services. Media Commun 2024;12:8116.
  113. Aday LA, Andersen R. A framework for the study of access to medical care. Health Serv Res 1974;9:208–20.4436074
  114. Levesque JF, Harris MF, Russell G. Patient-centred access to health care: conceptualising access at the interface of health systems and populations. Int J Equity Health 2013;12:18–9.23496984
  115. Tudor HJ. The inverse care law. Lancet 1971;297:405–12.
  116. Marmot M. An inverse care law for our time. BMJ 2018;362:k3216.30065009
  117. Williamson AK, Antonio MG, Davis S, Kameswaran V, Dillahunt TR, Buis LR, Veinot TC. Human technology intermediation to reduce cognitive load: understanding healthcare staff members’ practices to facilitate telehealth access in an FQHC patient population. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2024;31:832–45.38300760
  118. Design Council. The Double Diamond. London: Design Council (UK); 2005. URL: www.designcouncil.org.uk/our-resources/the-double-diamond/ (accessed 16 June 2024).
  119. Leach H, Payne R, Hanson I, King K. Video consulting for GP trainees. InnovAiT 2024;17:113–7.
  120. Davies AR, Honeyman M, Gann B. Addressing the digital inverse care law in the time of COVID-19: potential for digital technology to exacerbate or mitigate health inequalities. J Med Internet Res 2021;23:e21726.33735096
  121. Payne RA, Abel GA. UK indices of multiple deprivation – a way to make comparisons across constituent countries easier. Health Stat Q 2012;53:2015–6.
  122. Rosen R, Greenhalgh T. How can remote GP consultations be safer? BMJ 2022;379:o2843.
  123. Greenhalgh T, Payne R, McCabe F. Making remote healthcare safer. Int J Qual Health Care 2024;36:mzae023.38517123
  124. Payne R, MacIver E, Clarke A. Do new models of Primary Care risk exacerbating existing inequity? Br J Gen Pract 2024;74:436–7.39327083
  125. King K, Payne R. Teaching patient safety in remote consultations. Educ Prim Care 2024;36:2–5.39282914
  126. Newbould J, Ball S, Abel G, Barclay M, Brown T, Corbett J, et al. A ‘telephone first’ approach to demand management in English general practice: a multimethod evaluation. Health Soc Care Deliv Res 2019;7:1–58.
  127. Pickard Strange M, Booth A, Akiki M, Wieringa S, Shaw SE. The role of virtual consulting in developing environmentally sustainable health care: systematic literature review. J Med Internet Res 2023;25:e44823.37133914
  128. Alami H, Lehoux P, Shaw SE, Papoutsi C, Rybczynska-Bunt S, Fortin JP. Virtual care and the inverse care law: implications for policy, practice, research, public and patients. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2022;19:10591.36078313
  129. Payne R, Lodge A, Mackridge A, O'Keeffe D, Swann N, Clarke A, et al. After the teleconsultation: getting medicines to patients when pharmacy services are not available. Br J Gen Pract 2024;74:422–5.39209722
  130. Rosen R, Leone C. Getting the Best Out of Remote Consulting in General Practice – Practical Challenges and Policy Opportunities. London: Nuffield Trust; 2022. URL: www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/research/getting-the-best-out-of-remote-consulting-in-general-practice-practical-challenges-and-policy-opportunities (accessed 4 July 2024).
  131. Gov.uk. Spring Budget 2024. London: UK Government; 2024.
  132. Crenshaw K. Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics. In Maschke KJ, editor, Feminist Legal Theories. London: Routledge; 1997. pp. 23–51.
  133. Nielsen L. Personas-User Focused Design. Amsterdam: Springer; 2013.
  134. Cabrero DG, Winschiers-Theophilus H, Abdelnour-Nocera J. A Critique of Personas as Representations of ‘the other’ in Cross-Cultural Technology Design. In Awori K, Bidwell NJ, editors, Proceedings of the First African Conference on Human Computer Interaction (AfriCHI’16). Nairobi, Kenya: ACM; November 2016. pp. 149–54.
  135. Weimar SN, Martjan RS, Terzidis O. Conceptualizing the landscape of digital health entrepreneurship: a systematic review and research agenda. Manag Rev Q 2024; 75:1–49.
  136. Mayrink NN, Alcoforado L, Chioro A, Fernandes F, Lima TS, Camargo EB, Valentim RAM. Translational research in health technologies: a scoping review. Front Digit Health 2022;4:957367.35990015
  137. Mittra J. The New Health Bioeconomy: R&D Policy and Innovation for the Twenty-first Century. Amsterdam: Springer; 2015.
  138. Purohit A, Smith J, Hibble A. Does telemedicine reduce the carbon footprint of healthcare? A systematic review. Future Healthc J 2021;8:e85–91.33791483
  139. Lokmic-Tomkins Z, Davies S, Block LJ, Cochrane L, Dorin A, von Gerich H, et al. Assessing the carbon footprint of digital health interventions: a scoping review. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2022;29:2128–39.36314391
  140. Rodríguez‐Jiménez L, Romero‐Martín M, Spruell T, Steley Z, Gómez‐Salgado J. The carbon footprint of healthcare settings: a systematic review. J Adv Nurs 2023;79:2830–44.37198974
  141. NHS England. Delivering a ‘Net Zero’ National Health Service. London: NHS England; 2022.
← ConclusionsAdditional information →

Attribution. Trisha Greenhalgh; Anica Alvarez Nishio; Aileen Clarke; Richard Byng; Francesca Dakin; Stuart Faulkner et al. (2025). Remote and digital services in UK general practice 2021–2023: the Remote by Default 2 longitudinal qualitative study synopsis. National Institute for Health and Care Research. Copyright © 2025 Greenhalgh et al. Licensed under CC BY 4.0. NCBI Bookshelf NBK618573. CC BY 4.0. Original source ↗. Text reproduced from the Bookshelf XML without changing wording; figures, images and supplements are not reproduced.

In this chapter Contents

  • References

Source

OpenStax source file ↗

Source record ↗

EvidenceLib is a research-education resource, not medical advice. It does not diagnose, prescribe or recommend starting, stopping or changing any treatment. Talk to a qualified clinician about your own situation. Methods, sources and licences · Rights and removal requests · Legal · Support