Communication tips. Time flies: patients' perceptions of consultation length and actual duration.

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.

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.

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. A cross sectional study on patient satisfaction and its association with length of consultation at the University Malaya Medical Centre Primary Care Clinic.Malaysian family physician : the official journal of the Academy of Family Physicians of Malaysia · 2022
   Article
2. A Watched Pot Never Boils: Attentive Care Needs No Timer.Journal of patient-centered research and reviews · 2021
   Article
3. Predictors and outcomes of feeling of insufficient consultation time in cancer care in Korea: results of a nationwide multicenter survey.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2012
   Article
4. On time.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2010
   Article

Corrections and comments

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

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as