↓ Skip to main content

What Are the Consequences of Waiting for Health Care in the Veteran Population?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
policy
2 policy sources

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
81 Mendeley
Title
What Are the Consequences of Waiting for Health Care in the Veteran Population?
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, October 2011
DOI 10.1007/s11606-011-1819-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Steven D. Pizer, Julia C. Prentice

Abstract

National health reform is expected to increase how long individuals have to wait between requests for appointments and when their appointment is scheduled. The increase in demand for care due to more widespread insurance will result in longer waits if there is not also a concomitant increase in supply of healthcare services. Long waits for healthcare are hypothesized to compromise health because less frequent outpatient visits result in delays in diagnosis and treatment. Research testing this hypothesis is scarce due to a paucity of data on how long individuals wait for healthcare in the United States. The main exception is the Veterans Health Administration (VA) that has been routinely collecting data on how long veterans wait for outpatient care for over a decade. This narrative review summarizes the results of studies using VA wait time data to answer two main questions: 1) How much do longer wait times decrease healthcare utilization and 2) Do longer wait times cause poorer health outcomes? Longer VA wait times lead to small, yet statistically significant decreases in utilization and are related to poorer health in elderly and vulnerable veteran populations. Both long-term outcomes (e.g. mortality, preventable hospitalizations) and intermediate outcomes such as hemoglobin A1C levels are worse for veterans who seek care at facilities with longer waits compared to veterans who visit facilities with shorter waits. Further research is needed on the mechanisms connecting longer wait times and poorer outcomes including identifying patient sub-populations whose risks are most sensitive to delayed access to care. If wait times increase for the general patient population with the implementation of national reform as expected, U.S. healthcare policymakers and clinicians will need to consider policies and interventions that minimize potential harms for all patients.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 2%
Turkey 1 1%
Unknown 78 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 17%
Student > Bachelor 12 15%
Researcher 11 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 14%
Other 5 6%
Other 15 19%
Unknown 13 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 33%
Social Sciences 9 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 6%
Engineering 5 6%
Other 12 15%
Unknown 15 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 February 2020.
All research outputs
#1,837,851
of 25,646,963 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#1,396
of 8,231 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,727
of 148,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#2
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,646,963 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,231 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 148,919 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.