ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2016
Experiences and preferences of patients visiting an otorhinolaryngology outpatient clinic: a qualitative study.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- An evaluation of outpatient satisfaction in Chinese tertiary hospitals from a patient-centered perspective: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Nurse-patient communication experiences from the perspective of Iranian cancer patients in an outpatient oncology clinic: a qualitative study.BMC nursing · 2024Article
- How is patient-centred care conceptualized in women's health: a scoping review.BMC women's health · 2019Article
- A Survey of Patients' Perspectives on Outpatient HIV Care in the Netherlands.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2017Article
- Experiences and preferences of patients visiting a head and neck oncology outpatient clinic: a qualitative study.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient-centred care has received considerable attention in the last few decades, but the patients' perspective remains underexposed. This study reports on an in-depth evaluation of patients' experiences and preferences at an otorhinolaryngology outpatient department.
methodsQualitative research was conducted on patients' experiences and preferences at an otorhinolaryngology outpatient department in an academic hospital. The study comprised two phases. First, semi-structured interviews were held with 22 patients. Second, results from the interviews were verified and deepened in a focus group (N = 7).
resultsOverall, experience with patient-centred care was positive at the outpatient department. Three of the six dimensions of patient-centred care predominated in the interviews and the focus group: information, communication and education; coordination and integration of care; and respect for patients' values, preferences and expressed needs. The negative experiences were mostly in these dimensions. The dimensions physical comfort and involvement of family and friends were of lesser significance. Opinion on emotional support--relieving fear and anxiety differed as to whether this was the responsibility of the doctor or the patient.
conclusionQualitative research provided a deeper understanding of patients' experiences and preferences at an otorhinolaryngology outpatient department. Such an in-depth evaluation can be useful in the transition towards patient-centred care.
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.