SynthesisBMC health services research2017
Patients' preferences for primary health care - a systematic literature review of discrete choice experiments.
Synthesis 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 81 papers, 5 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
81 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Choice of primary healthcare providers among population in urban areas of low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review of literature.BMC primary care · 2026Pooled it
- Discrete Choice Experiments and Conjoint Analyses in Health Screening Programs for Type 2 Diabetes and Liver Disease: A Scoping Review.Canadian liver journal · 2025Pooled it
- Conjoint analyses of patients' preferences for primary care: a systematic review.BMC primary care · 2022Pooled it
- Factors influencing general practitioners decisions to refer Paediatric patients to the emergency department: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.BMC family practice · 2020Pooled it
- Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: Past, Present and Future.PharmacoEconomics · 2019Pooled it
- Factors for Patient Trust and Acceptance of Medical Artificial Intelligence.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Attributes and levels in discrete choice experiments for pharmacy services: A systematic review to inform asthma intervention design.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2026Review
- Re-evaluating the access imperative in healthcare in the United States.Journal of public health policy · 2026Review
- Patient Valuation of Visit Types, Speed of Care, and Continuity With Primary Care Physicians: A Discrete-Choice Survey.Annals of family medicine · 2026Article
- Quantifying patient preferences for inpatient pharmacist consultation: a multi-center discrete choice experiment in Sichuan, China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Community Hypertension Patients' Preferences for Family Doctor Service Packages in China: A Discrete Choice Experiment.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2026Article
- Using discrete choice experiment to investigate public preferences for osteoporosis community-level management strategies in China.Journal of bone and mineral metabolism · 2026Article
- Public preferences for preventative dental care: a discrete choice experiment in China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Re-Evaluating Access in Healthcare: Focus on Quality of Care.Public health challenges · 2025Review
- An Acceptability and Feasibility Study of a Nurse-Led Model of Contraception and Abortion Care in Rural General Practice.Journal of advanced nursing · 2025Article
- How Stable Are Individual Preferences for Health Expenditure in Germany?Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Patient preferences for key organizational features of primary cardiovascular care in Quebec: a discrete choice experiment.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Which questionnaires can be used to elicit patients' preferences regarding patient-provider consultations? Results of a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Convenience or Continuity: When Are Patients Willing to Wait to See Their Own Doctor?Annals of family medicine · 2025Article
21 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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
backgroundPrimary care is a key element of health care systems and addresses the main health problems of the population. Due to the demographic change, primary care even gains in importance. The knowledge of the patients' preferences can help policy makers as well as physicians to set priorities in their effort to make health care delivery more responsive to patients' needs. Our objective was to describe which aspects of primary care were included in preference studies and which of them were the most preferred aspects.
methodsIn order to elicit the preferences for primary care, a systematic literature search was conducted. Two researchers searched three electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, and PsycINFO) and conducted a narrative synthesis. Inclusion criteria were: focus on primary health care delivery, discrete choice experiment as elicitation method, and studies published between 2006 and 2015 in English language.
resultsWe identified 18 studies that elicited either the patients' or the population's preferences for primary care based on a discrete choice experiment. Altogether the studies used 16 structure attributes, ten process attributes and four outcome attributes. The most commonly applied structure attribute was "Waiting time till appointment", the most frequently used process attribute was "Shared decision making / professional's attention paid to your views". "Receiving the 'best' treatment" was the most commonly applied outcome attribute. Process attributes were most often the ones of highest importance for patients or the population. The attributes and attribute levels used in the discrete choice experiments were identified by literature research, qualitative research, expert interviews, or the analysis of policy documents.
conclusionsThe results of the DCE studies show different preferences for primary health care. The diversity of the results may have several reasons, such as the method of analysis, the selection procedure of the attributes and their levels or the specific research question of the study. As the results of discrete choice experiments depend on many different factors, it is important for a better comprehensibility of the studies to transparently report the steps undertaken in a study as well as the interim results regarding the identification of attributes and levels.
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.