Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16266648›Full record

ArticleAtencion primaria2005

[Perceptions and expectations on primary health care: a new form of identifying improvements in the care system].

S Redondo Martín, E Bolaños Gallardo, A Almaraz Gómez, J A Maderuelo Fernández

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
In one paragraph

Article in Atencion primaria, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Hotel housekeepers and occupational health: experiences and perceived risks.Annals of occupational and environmental medicine · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

S Redondo MartínServicio de Promoción de la Salud y Programas Preventivos, Consejería de Sanidad, Junta de Castilla y León, Valladolid, Spain. susanala@delfin.retcal.es
E Bolaños Gallardo
A Almaraz Gómez
J A Maderuelo Fernández

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo analyse the opinions of the users of primary care on the care that they receive and to identify the principal areas of satisfaction.

designQualitative study using discussion groups and open interviews during the period January-May 2003.

settingHealth areas of Valladolid, Spain.

participantsThe inclusion criteria were: to have attended a primary care clinic at sometime and to be between 35 and 80 years old. Recruitment was carried out through key informants, using the snowball technique.

method6 discussion groups and interviews with representatives of 3 nursing and 1 residents association were carried out. Structural sampling was carried out as regards the variables that influenced satisfaction. The conversations were recorded using tape recorders and literally transcribed on paper. The analysis of the texts was carried out by 2 investigators and concordance was sought between them.

resultsThe principal areas related to satisfaction were: the treatment received from the professionals, which is considered a fundamental part of care, combined with the technical quality, continuity of the care, the admission services, the bureaucratic procedures, the barriers for accessing specialised services, and waiting lists.

conclusionsPersonalized care, the time dedicated by the professional, the continuity of care, and waiting lists are the principal areas related to the perceived satisfaction of the patients. The possible responses to improve this situation are: the implementation of changes in the care management and organisation which would simplify the procedures, investment of resources (human and economic), changes in the model of the professional-patient relationship, and improvements in undergraduate and postgraduate training.

Indexed as

Patient SatisfactionAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrimary Health Care

Identifiers

PMID16266648
PMCPMC7669213

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.