Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28476173›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2017

"They made me feel comfortable": a comparison of methods to measure patient experience in a sexual health clinic.

Alison R Howarth, Sophie Day, Linda Greene, Helen Ward

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Building Trust in a Newly Established Physician-Patient Relationship: A Scoping Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Experience of Sexual Healthcare by Māori and Non-Māori Young People: An Online Survey of 15-24 Year Olds in Hawkes Bay, New Zealand.International journal of sexual health : official journal of the World Association for Sexual Health · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Alison R HowarthPatient Experience Research Centre, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, St Mary's Campus, Norfolk Place, London, W2 1PG, UK.
Sophie DayPatient Experience Research Centre, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, St Mary's Campus, Norfolk Place, London, W2 1PG, UK.
Linda GreeneJefferiss Wing Centre for Sexual Health, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Praed Street, London, W2 1NY, UK.
Helen WardPatient Experience Research Centre, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, St Mary's Campus, Norfolk Place, London, W2 1PG, UK. h.ward@imperial.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHigh quality sexual health services are needed to improve both individual and public health outcomes. This study set out to explore what is important to patients who visit a sexual health clinic, and examine their understanding of standard survey questions, in order to inform the collection and interpretation of patient experience data that are used to improve services.

methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional, qualitative study. In the first part of the interview, we used "discovery interviews" to explore patients' experiences of attending a central London walk-in sexual health clinic. In the second part, we asked patients how they would respond to eight standard patient experience survey questions and to provide an explanation for each of their responses. We conducted a thematic analysis of the interview data.

resultsWe interviewed seventeen participants (nine women, eight men) of different ethnicities and backgrounds. All interviewees were positive about their experience. They described how staff had made them feel "comfortable", and talked about how staff spent time, listened and did not rush them, despite being a very busy clinic. In response to the survey questions, fourteen patients rated their as care excellent or very good overall. However, survey questions were interpreted in different ways and were not always easily understood.

conclusionsThe open-ended "discovery interviews" provided new insights into aspects of care that were most valued or could improve. Standard patient experience questions provide a rating but little elucidation of the experiences that lie behind patients' responses. They do not always measure aspects of care valued by patients or identify areas for improvement. They are not uniformly understood and necessarily collapse a wide range of experiences and views into categories that may seem inappropriate. Qualitative methods have a key role in measuring patient experience and involving patients in service improvement.

Indexed as

Patient ComfortPatient SatisfactionSexual HealthAdultAgedAmbulatory CareCross-Sectional StudiesDelivery of Health CareEmotionsFemaleHealth Services ResearchHumansLondonMaleMiddle AgedProfessional-Patient RelationsHealth services researchPatient experienceQualitative researchResearch methodologyService delivery

Identifiers

PMID28476173
PMCPMC5418717

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.