ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2011
Patient feedback in revalidation: an exploratory study using the consultation satisfaction questionnaire.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Patient and public involvement in medical performance processes: A systematic review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2019Pooled it
- Perceptions of people with respiratory problems on physician performance evaluation-A qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020Article
- Management of gynecomastia-changes in psychological aspects after surgery-a systematic review.Gland surgery · 2018Review
- Patients satisfaction with consultation at primary health care centers in Abha City, Saudi Arabia.Journal of family medicine and primary careArticle
- Patients' satisfaction with services provided by family physicians at the Comprehensive Healthcare Centers in Northern Jordan.Journal of family & community medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRevalidation is the UK process for the review of doctors to ensure they are fit to practise. Revalidation will include patient feedback.
aimTo investigate the role of patient feedback on GPs' consultations in revalidation. DESIGN AND
settingCross-sectional survey of patients consulting 171 GPs.
methodA total of 6433 patients aged 16 years or over completed the consultation satisfaction questionnaire (CSQ). Generalisability analysis was undertaken, scale scores calculated, and outliers identified using two and three standard deviations from the mean as control limits. Comments made by patients were categorised into positive, neutral, or negative.
resultsAfter averaging each scale for each doctor, mean scores (standard deviation), out of a possible score of 100, were: general satisfaction 78.1 (7.2); professional care 82.1 (6.1); relationship 71.2 (7.1); perceived time 65.7 (7.6). A D-study (which enables estimation of the reliability from 0-1 of the CSQ scores for different numbers of responders for each doctor), indicated that ratings by 19 patients would achieve a generalisability coefficient of 0.80 for the combined score. Fifteen GPs had one or more scale scores below two standard deviations of the mean. Comments were more often negative for GPs with scores below two standard deviations of the mean.
conclusionMost patients of most GPs are satisfied with their experience of consultations, and ways to make patient feedback formative for these doctors is required. For a few GPs, most patients report some dissatisfaction. Patient feedback may identify doctors who need educational support and possibly remediation, but agreed questionnaire score thresholds are required, and agreement is needed on the weight to be attached to patient experience in comparison with other aspects of performance.
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.