ArticleBMJ open2016
Understanding negative feedback from South Asian patients: an experimental vignette study.
Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Barriers and facilitators to accessing healthcare for early diagnosis of prostate cancer for black men-a qualitative exploration in North-East England and Scotland.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Creating and administering video vignettes for a study examining the communication of diagnostic uncertainty: methodological insights to improve accessibility for researchers and participants.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
- Comparing healthcare quality: A common framework for both ordinal and cardinal data with an application to primary care variation in England.Health economics · 2022Article
- Are parents' geographical origin associated with their evaluation of child and adolescent mental health services? Results from a national survey in Norway.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2021Article
- The use of experimental vignette studies to identify drivers of variations in the delivery of health care: a scoping review.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Article
- Patient experiences with general practice in Norway: a comparison of immigrant groups and the majority population following a national survey.BMC health services research · 2020Article
- The Antecedents of Poor Doctor-Patient Relationship in Mobile Consultation: A Perspective from Computer-Mediated Communication.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Applicant Fairness Perceptions of a Robot-Mediated Job Interview: A Video Vignette-Based Experimental Survey.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2020Article
- Culturally-adapted cognitive behavioural therapy based intervention for maternal depression: a mixed-methods feasibility study.BMC women's health · 2019Article
- Patients' experience of primary care: James Mackenzie Lecture 2017.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019Article
- Unhappy Patients Are Not Alike: Content Analysis of the Negative Comments from China's Good Doctor Website.Journal of medical Internet research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesIn many countries, minority ethnic groups report poorer care in patient surveys. This could be because they get worse care or because they respond differently to such surveys. We conducted an experiment to determine whether South Asian people in England rate simulated GP consultations the same or differently from White British people. If these groups rate consultations similarly when viewing identical simulated consultations, it would be more likely that the lower scores reported by minority ethnic groups in real surveys reflect real differences in quality of care.
designExperimental vignette study. Trained fieldworkers completed computer-assisted personal interviews during which participants rated 3 video recordings of simulated GP-patient consultations, using 5 communication items from the English GP Patient Survey. Consultations were shown in a random order, selected from a pool of 16.
settingGeographically confined areas of ∼130 households (output areas) in England, selected using proportional systematic sampling.
participants564 White British and 564 Pakistani adults recruited using an in-home face-to-face approach.
main outcome measureMean differences in communication score (on a scale of 0-100) between White British and Pakistani participants, estimated from linear regression.
resultsPakistani participants, on average, scored consultations 9.8 points higher than White British participants (95% CI 8.0 to 11.7, p<0.001) when viewing the same consultations. When adjusted for age, gender, deprivation, self-rated health and video, the difference increased to 11.0 points (95% CI 8.5 to 13.6, p<0.001). The largest differences were seen when participants were older (>55) and where communication was scripted to be poor.
conclusionsSubstantial differences in ratings were found between groups, with Pakistani respondents giving higher scores than White British respondents to videos showing the same care. Our findings suggest that the lower scores reported by Pakistani patients in national surveys represent genuinely worse experiences of communication compared to the White British majority.
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.