ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2017
The Patient Feedback Response Framework - Understanding why UK hospital staff find it difficult to make improvements based on patient feedback: A qualitative study.
Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
55 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Health system responsiveness: a systematic evidence mapping review of the global literature.International journal for equity in health · 2021Pooled it
- Applying natural language processing and machine learning techniques to patient experience feedback: a systematic review.BMJ health & care informatics · 2021Pooled it
- How is patient involvement measured in patient centeredness scales for health professionals? A systematic review of their measurement properties and content.BMC health services research · 2019Pooled it
- What can patients tell us about the quality and safety of hospital care? Findings from a UK multicentre survey study.BMJ quality & safety · 2018Trial
- Frameworks for Action: A Scoping Review of Organisational Patient Engagement Models in Healthcare.The International journal of health planning and management · 2026Article
- Powerless or Powerful? Healthcare Professionals' Construction of Agency in Patient and Family Engagement Accounts.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Beyond gratitude: a qualitative investigation of compliment letters received by a neonatology service.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Transforming Patient Feedback Into Actionable Insights Through Natural Language Processing: Knowledge Discovery and Action Research Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Legitimacy as Social Infrastructure: A Critical Interpretive Synthesis of the Literature on Legitimacy in Health and Technology.JMIR human factors · 2025Review
- Unlocking Patient and Professional Value Through Patient Experience: Preliminary Development and Validation of the Patient Experience Assessment of In-Center Hemodialysis (PEACHD) Survey.Journal of patient experience · 2025Article
- Staff feedback within an acute mental health hospital: a qualitative interview study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Adverse events and perceived abandonment: learning from patients' accounts of medical mishaps.BMJ open quality · 2024Article
- Patient influence on general practice service improvement decision making: a participatory research mixed-methods intervention study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024Article
- Experiences of co-producing person-centred and cohesive clinical pathways in the national system for knowledge-based management in Swedish healthcare: a qualitative study.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
- Assessing an innovative method to promote learning from patient narratives: Findings from a field experiment in ambulatory care.Health services research · 2024Article
- Leveraging Patients' Creative Ideas for Innovation in Health Care.The Milbank quarterly · 2024Article
- National surveys of patient experiences with addiction services in Norway: do employees use the results in quality initiatives and are results improving over time?Frontiers in health services · 2024Article
- The perceived benefits and effectiveness of patient feedback systems in strengthening patient-provider relationships in Rural Tanzania.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Advanced Sentiment Analysis for Managing and Improving Patient Experience: Application for General Practitioner (GP) Classification in Northamptonshire.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- The introduction of a value-based reimbursement programme-Alignment and resistance among healthcare providers.The International journal of health planning and management · 2023Article
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
Patients are increasingly being asked for feedback about their healthcare experiences. However, healthcare staff often find it difficult to act on this feedback in order to make improvements to services. This paper draws upon notions of legitimacy and readiness to develop a conceptual framework (Patient Feedback Response Framework - PFRF) which outlines why staff may find it problematic to respond to patient feedback. A large qualitative study was conducted with 17 ward based teams between 2013 and 2014, across three hospital Trusts in the North of England. This was a process evaluation of a wider study where ward staff were encouraged to make action plans based on patient feedback. We focus on three methods here: i) examination of taped discussion between ward staff during action planning meetings ii) facilitators notes of these meetings iii) telephone interviews with staff focusing on whether action plans had been achieved six months later. Analysis employed an abductive approach. Through the development of the PFRF, we found that making changes based on patient feedback is a complex multi-tiered process and not something that ward staff can simply 'do'. First, staff must exhibit normative legitimacy - the belief that listening to patients is a worthwhile exercise. Second, structural legitimacy has to be in place - ward teams need adequate autonomy, ownership and resource to enact change. Some ward teams are able to make improvements within their immediate control and environment. Third, for those staff who require interdepartmental co-operation or high level assistance to achieve change, organisational readiness must exist at the level of the hospital otherwise improvement will rarely be enacted. Case studies drawn from our empirical data demonstrate the above. It is only when appropriate levels of individual and organisational capacity to change exist, that patient feedback is likely to be acted upon to improve services.
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.