English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background Seeing a general practitioner (GP) after first discovering conditions related to ill health is important for the prevention or timely treatment of major diseases. Receiving information about increased health risk, e.g. from participating in a health study, might increase awareness and trigger a visit to the GP. The question is: Do people allocated in different socioeconomic (SE) groups respond differently to receiving information about increased health risk? This could indirectly increase socioeconomic inequalities in health. In this study we are aiming to analyse patterns of GP contact after being informed that measurements from the HUNT study had deviant values suggesting increased health risk. Methods We use data from several Norwegian national registries which were linked to the HUNT study (The Nord-Trøndelag Health Study). Cox-proportional hazard models as well as repeated measurement models are estimated in order to explore patterns of GP contact. Health exposures are: measured high blood pressure (BP) (systolic and diastolic), high blood glucose, high serum cholesterol. SE status is measured through educational attainment (low, medium, high). Preliminary results In the analysis for GP contact within a year after HUNT, we had information on 42,581 persons, with 295,188 contacts with primary health service. In our data 8% had clinical measurements indicating high BP (160/100), 60% had high serum cholesterol levels (5,2 mmol/L) and 3% had high blood glucose levels ( &amp;gt; =9 mmol/L). Women in the lowest social group generally used less time to see their GP than both higher educational groups. For men this was less clear cut. Conclusions We aimed to analyse SE differences in response to receiving information about increased health risk. The analysis thus far suggests that women in lower SE groups see their GP a relatively short time after being informed. This is less clear cut for men. Further analysis will shed further light on utilisation patterns. Key messages Women in lower SE groups take less time to see a GP after being informed of increased health risk. SE differences in primary health care utilisation might be less clear cut than previously suggested.

Time to use of primary health care after being informed about increased health risk in HUNT