ReviewJournal of nephrology2018
Measuring patient experience in dialysis: a new paradigm of quality assessment.
Review in Journal of nephrology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating Algorithm-Driven Analytics and Clinical Decision Support in Remote Monitoring in Automated Peritoneal Dialysis: Patient and Clinician Experiences.Blood purification · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a measure to assess patient experience of needling of arteriovenous fistulas or grafts for haemodialysis access: the NPREM.Clinical kidney journal · 2025Article
- 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
- Impact of COVID-19 on patient experience of kidney care: a rapid review.Journal of nephrology · 2024Review
- Measuring patients' experience with renal services in the UK: development and validation of the Kidney PREM.Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association · 2022Article
- Shortcoming of Measuring Patient Satisfaction's Association With Anemia-Based Cardiovascular Risk in End-Stage Kidney Disease Patients.Cardiology research · 2021Article
- Article
- Dialysis Prescription and Sudden Death.Seminars in nephrology · 2018Review
- Patient-Reported Experiences of Dialysis Care Within a National Pay-for-Performance System.JAMA internal medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Patients' experience of care (PEC) is as an important dimension in quality of care. As a distinct entity from patient satisfaction and patient health-related quality of life, PEC is defined as patients' perceptions of the range of interactions they have with the health care system, including care from providers, facilities, and health plans. While traditionally PEC may be ascertained via informal assessments, in recent years, especially in the United States, there has been a shift towards standardized surveillance of PEC amongst dialysis patients in order to: (1) set a normative expectation regarding the importance of PEC; (2) standardize the components of patients' experience that are assessed to minimize potential "blind spots"; (3) provide a direct "voice" to the patient in communicating perceptions of their care; (4) facilitate comparisons of quality across facilities; and (5) broaden accountability for PEC to the entire multidisciplinary dialysis care team. In this review, we will discuss the significance of PEC as a quality of care metric in dialysis patients; the history of PEC assessment across other health care arenas; the development of the In-Center Hemodialysis Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Provider and Systems survey as a means to standardize PEC assessment among US dialysis patients; experiences in PEC assessment across international dialysis populations; and future areas of research needed to refine the ascertainment of PEC and its impact upon patient outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28432639What 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.