Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11458480›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2001

Managing patient demand: a qualitative study of appointment making in general practice.

M Gallagher, P Pearson, C Drinkwater, J Guy

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Impact of the clinically oriented roles of a general practice receptionist: a systematic review with narrative synthesis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Understanding access to general practice through the lens of candidacy: a critical review of the literature.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Receptionist rECognition and rEferral of Patients with Stroke (RECEPTS): unannounced simulated patient telephone call study in primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2015
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Front desk talk: discourse analysis of receptionist-patient interaction.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2009
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Qualitative insights into practice time management: does 'patient-centred time' in practice management offer a portal to improved access?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

M GallagherDepartment of Primary Care, University of Newcastle upon Tyne. morris.gallagher@ncl.ac.uk
P Pearson
C Drinkwater
J Guy

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundManaging patients' requests for appointments is an important general practice activity. No previous research has systematically observed how patients and receptionists negotiate appointments.

aimTo observe appointment making and investigate patients' and professionals' experiences of appointment negotiations. DESIGN OF STUDY: A qualitative study using participant observation.

settingThree general practices on Tyneside; a single-handed practice, a practice comprising three doctors, and a seven-doctor practice.

methodParticipant observation sessions, consisting of 35 activity recordings and 34 periods of observation and 38 patient and 15 professional interviews, were set up. Seven groups of patients were selected for interview. These included patients attending an 'open access' surgery, patients who complained about making an appointment, and patients who complimented the receptionists.

resultsAppointment making is a complex social process. Outcomes are dependent on the process of negotiation and factors, such as patients' expectations and appointment availability. Receptionists felt that patients in employment, patients allocated to the practice by the Health Authority, and patients who did not comply with practice appointment rules were most demanding. Appointment requests are legitimised by receptionists enforcing practice rules and requesting clinical information. Patients volunteer information to provide evidence that their complaint is appropriate and employ strategies, such as persistence, assertiveness, and threats, to try and persuade receptionists to grant appointments.

conclusionAppointment making is a complex social process where outcomes are negotiated. Receptionists have an important role in managing patient demand. Practices should be explicit about how appointments are allocated, including publishing practice criteria.

Indexed as

Appointments and SchedulesPatient Acceptance of Health CareAdolescentAdultAgedAttitude of Health PersonnelEnglandFamily PracticeHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansMedical ReceptionistsMiddle AgedNegotiatingPatient SatisfactionProfessional-Patient Relations

Identifiers

PMID11458480
PMCPMC1313977

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.