ArticlePsychiatric services (Washington, D.C.)2009
Are comparisons of consumer satisfaction with providers biased by nonresponse or case-mix differences?
Article in Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.), 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nonresponse Bias on Inpatient Rehabilitation Hospitals' Experience of Care Quality Measure Scores.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2024Article
- Implications of Variation in the Relationships between Beneficiary Characteristics and Medicare Advantage CAHPS Measures.Health services research · 2017Article
- Evidence of non-response bias in the Press-Ganey patient satisfaction survey.BMC health services research · 2016Article
- Removing very low-performing therapists: A simulation of performance-based retention in psychotherapy.Psychotherapy (Chicago, Ill.) · 2015Article
- Assessing the accuracy of profiling methods for identifying top providers: performance of mental health care providers.Health services & outcomes research methodology · 2013Article
- Is dropout after a first psychotherapy visit always a bad outcome?Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) · 2012Article
- Improving satisfaction in patients receiving mental health care: a case study.The journal of behavioral health services & research · 2012Article
- Comparison of telephone with World Wide Web-based responses by parents and teens to a follow-up survey after injury.Health services research · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study examined how consumer satisfaction ratings differ between mental health care providers to determine whether comparison of ratings is biased by differences in survey response rates or consumer characteristics.
methodsConsumer satisfaction surveys mailed by a mixed-model prepaid health plan were examined. Survey data were linked to computerized records regarding consumers' demographic (age, sex, and type of insurance coverage) and clinical (primary diagnosis and initial versus return visit) characteristics. Statistical models examined probabilities of returning the survey (N=8,025 returned surveys) and of giving an excellent satisfaction rating. Variability was separated into within-provider effects and between-provider effects.
resultsThe overall response rate was 33.8%, and 49.9% of responders reported excellent satisfaction. Neither response rate nor satisfaction rating was related to primary diagnosis. Within the practices of individual providers, response rate and receiving an excellent rating were significantly associated with female sex, older age, longer enrollment in the health plan, and making a return visit. Analyses of between-provider effects, however, found that only a higher proportion of return visitors was significantly associated with higher response rates and higher satisfaction ratings.
conclusionsThere was little evidence that differences in response rate or in consumers served biased comparison of satisfaction ratings between mental health providers. Bias might be greater in a setting with more heterogeneous consumers or providers. Returning consumers gave higher ratings than first-time visitors, and analyses of satisfaction ratings may need to account for this difference. Extremely high or low ratings should be interpreted cautiously, especially for providers with a small number of surveys.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.