IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Measuring potential physical accessibility to general practitioners in rural areas: A method and case study

Listed author(s):
  • Joseph, Alun E.
  • Bantock, Peter R.
Registered author(s):

    The general practitioner is the key element within most rural health care delivery systems, virtually controlling referal to higher levels of care as well as providing basic care. In consequence of the progressive urban-based centralization of health care facilities and specialized personnel encouraged by the desire to take advantage of economies of scale in supply, the role of the general practitioner within rural health care delivery has become increasingly crucial. However, the supply of general practitioners in rural areas has not kept pace with demands, and accessibility to physicians has become a pressing issue in many rural areas. Although 'accessibility' is not taken to be synonymous with physical or geographical accessibility, the dispersed settlement characteristic of most rural areas elevates the latter to a position of primary importance. Following a discussion of the merits of measures of accessibility based upon utilization versus measures based upon the relative location of population and physicians, a measure on potential physical accessibility is presented and applied to a Canadian data set. The results suggest that although considerable differences in potential accessibility exist between rural areas near and far from urban centres, the smaller catchment populations of most rural general practitioners may partly compensate for isolation from major, urban concentrations of physicians.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Social Science & Medicine.

    Volume (Year): 16 (1982)
    Issue (Month): 1 (January)
    Pages: 85-90

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:16:y:1982:i:1:p:85-90
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Postal:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:16:y:1982:i:1:p:85-90. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.