ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2017
Reliability of Physician-Level Measures of Patient Experience in Primary Care.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differential Effect of Patient- and Provider-Level Factors on Patient Satisfaction Scores in Academic General Internal Medicine Clinics.Journal of general internal medicine · 2024Article
- Physician Compensation Arrangements and Financial Performance Incentives in US Health Systems.JAMA health forum · 2022Article
- Considerations of Bias and Reliability in Publicly Reported Physician Ratings.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Article
- The association between Asian patient race/ethnicity and lower satisfaction scores.BMC health services research · 2020Article
- Patient Satisfaction with Clinicians and Short-Term Mortality in a US National Sample: the Roles of Morbidity and Gender.Journal of general internal medicine · 2019Article
- Balancing patient priorities for technical and interactional aspects of care in a measure of primary care quality.Primary health care research & development · 2019Article
- Association of Clinician Denial of Patient Requests With Patient Satisfaction.JAMA internal medicine · 2018Article
- Adolescent and Young Adult Perspectives on Quality and Value in Health Care.Academic pediatricsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatient experience measures are widely used to compare performance at the individual physician level.
objectiveTo assess the impact of unmeasured patient characteristics on visit-level patient experience measures and the sample sizes required to reliably measure patient experience at the primary care physician (PCP) level.
designRepeated cross-sectional design.
settingAcademic family medicine practice in California.
participantsOne thousand one hundred forty-one adult patients attending 1319 visits with 56 PCPs (including 45 resident and 11 faculty physicians). MEASUREMENTS: Post-visit patient experience surveys including patient measures used for standard adjustment as recommend by the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Consortium and additional patient characteristics used for expanded adjustment (including attitudes toward healthcare, global life satisfaction, patient personality, current symptom bother, and marital status).
resultsThe amount of variance in patient experience explained doubled with expanded adjustment for patient characteristics compared with standard adjustment (R
conclusionsWidely used methods for measuring PCP-level patient experience may not account sufficiently for influential patient characteristics. If methods were adapted to account for these characteristics, patient sample sizes for reliable between-physician comparisons may be too large for most practices to obtain.
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.