Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17761062›Full record

SynthesisThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2007

Patient satisfaction questionnaires for primary care out-of-hours services: a systematic review.

Andrew M Garratt, Kirsten Danielsen, Steinar Hunskaar

Abstract readEvaluation StudySystematic ReviewValidation Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Patient and family experiences with accessing telephone cancer treatment symptom support: a descriptive study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2016
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Measuring performance quality in general practice: is international harmonization desirable?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2007
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Andrew M GarrattInstitute of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, Oslo and Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Norway. andrew.garratt@kunnskapssenteret.no
Kirsten Danielsen
Steinar Hunskaar

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient satisfaction questionnaires are increasingly used for assessing quality of care.

aimTo review the evidence for the reliability and validity of patient satisfaction questionnaires for out-of-hours care.

designSystematic review.

settingPrimary care out-of-hours services.

methodSearches of CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE((R)) and PsycINFO using terms relevant to the measurement of patient satisfaction and out-of-hours services. Abstracts were reviewed and information relating to questionnaire content, data quality, reliability, and validity were extracted from articles by two independent researchers.

resultsFour questionnaires were found, two from the UK - the Patient Satisfaction with Out-of-Hours Care (PSOC) and Short Questionnaire for Out-of-Hours Care (SQOC) - and two from the Netherlands - the van Uden and Moll van Charante questionnaires. Questionnaire content was based on literature reviews and expert opinion; the PSOC and Moll van Charante questionnaires were also developed following interviews or focus groups with patients. Cronbach's alpha values were below 0.7 for some scales within the PSOC and van Uden questionnaires. Test-retest reliability was reported for the PSOC and Moll van Charante questionnaires. Tests of validity were few and did not give explicit consideration to the size of expected associations.

conclusionPotential users wishing to assess patient satisfaction should carefully consider the content of the questionnaires and its relevance to the application and patient group. The four questionnaires have limitations relating to their development and evaluation. The PSOC and van Uden questionnaires have low levels of reliability for some scales, which should be used with caution in future surveys.

Indexed as

Patient SatisfactionAfter-Hours CareHealth Care SurveysHumansPrimary Health CareReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID17761062
PMCPMC2151790

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.