ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2017
The Friends and Family Test in general practice in England: a qualitative study of the views of staff and patients.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The ultimate question? Evaluating the use of Net Promoter Score in healthcare: A systematic review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Pooled it
- Human and Artificial Intelligence (AI) Analysis of Patient Experiences of Periodontal Graft Surgery.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- One step on the QI journey: team perspectives on surveys for improvement.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Longitudinal Insights from Blended Hearing Care: Service Modality Choices, Support Received, and Satisfaction Ratings.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- How does staff and patient feedback on hospital quality relate to mortality outcomes? A provider-level national study.Health services management research · 2024Article
- Quality of locally designed surveys in a quality improvement collaborative: review of survey validity and identification of common errors.BMJ open quality · 2024Article
- Net Promoter Score: a prospective, single-centre observational study assessing if a single question determined treatment success after primary or revision hip arthroplasty.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Observational
- Article
- Evaluating patient-reported outcome measures in Peru: a cross-sectional study of satisfaction and net promoter score using the 2016 EnSuSalud survey.BMJ quality & safety · 2022Article
- Orthotic Device Use in Canine Patients: Owner Perception of Quality of Life for Owners and Patients.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2021Article
- Implementing a survey for patients to provide safety experience feedback following a care transition: a feasibility study.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- The Patient Experience: Informing Practice through Identification of Meaningful Communication from the Patient's Perspective.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Article
- Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Friends and Family Test (FFT) was introduced into general practices in England in 2015 to provide staff with information on patients' views of their experience of care.
aimTo examine the views of practice staff and patients of the FFT, how the results are used, and to recommend improvements. DESIGN AND
settingA qualitative study of a national representative sample of 42 general practices.
methodSemi-structured interviews with 43 clinicians, 48 practice managers, and 27 patient representatives. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed, and analysed thematically.
resultsAlthough the FFT imposed little extra work on practices, it was judged to provide little additional insight over existing methods and to have had minimal impact on improving quality. Staff lacked confidence in the accuracy of the results given the lack of a representative sample and the risk of bias. The FFT question was judged to be inappropriate as in many areas there was no alternative practice for patients to choose, patients' individual needs would not be the same as those of their friends and relatives, and an overall assessment failed to identify any specific aspects of good- or poor-quality care. Despite being intended to support local quality improvement, there was widespread unease about the FFT, with many responders perceiving it as a tool for national bodies to monitor general practices.
conclusionIf the use of a single-item questionnaire is to continue, changes should be made to the wording. It should be focused on stimulating local quality improvement, and practice staff should be supported to use the results effectively.
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.