ArticleBMJ quality & safety2018
Wisdom of patients: predicting the quality of care using aggregated patient feedback.
Article in BMJ quality & safety, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 6 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
45 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Understanding healthcare professionals' responses to patient complaints in secondary and tertiary care in the UK: A systematic review and behavioural analysis using the Theoretical Domains Framework.Health research policy and systems · 2024Pooled it
- Characteristics of positive feedback provided by UK health service users: content analysis of examples from two databases.BMJ health & care informatics · 2024Pooled it
- Applying natural language processing and machine learning techniques to patient experience feedback: a systematic review.BMJ health & care informatics · 2021Pooled it
- What methods are used to promote patient and family involvement in healthcare regulation? A multiple case study across four countries.BMC health services research · 2020Pooled it
- What Do Patients Complain About Online: A Systematic Review and Taxonomy Framework Based on Patient Centeredness.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Pooled it
- The impact of patient feedback on the medical performance of qualified doctors: a systematic review.BMC medical education · 2018Pooled it
- Evaluating SinergiAPS, an intervention based on patient feedback to improve patient safety in primary care: a cluster randomized trial.BMC medicine · 2025Trial
- Construction of an index system for workplace services by family doctors in China: a two-round Delphi study.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- The Use of Natural Language Processing to Interpret Unstructured Patient Feedback on Health Services: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- An Exploration of Online Positive Feedback in Relation to Mental Health Nursing Practice.International journal of mental health nursing · 2025Article
- Involving Service Users in Care Regulation: A Scoping Review of Empirical Literature.International journal of health policy and management · 2025Article
- Using Online Reviews to Drive Person-Centered Care: An HCAHPS-Validated Approach.Journal of patient experience · 2025Article
- How does staff and patient feedback on hospital quality relate to mortality outcomes? A provider-level national study.Health services management research · 2024Article
- Correlations between care users' and the healthcare inspectorate's ratings of the quality of care in long-term care homes.BMJ open quality · 2023Article
- Health service improvement using positive patient feedback: Systematic scoping review.PloS one · 2023Article
- Disparate healthcare experiences of people living with overweight or obesity in England.EClinicalMedicine · 2021Article
- A systematic approach to public health - Novel application of the human factors analysis and classification system to public health and COVID-19.Safety science · 2021Article
- Machine learning in medicine: a practical introduction to natural language processing.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Article
- Using Text Mining Techniques to Identify Health Care Providers With Patient Safety Problems: Exploratory Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Categorising patient concerns using natural language processing techniques.BMJ health & care informatics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Care Quality Commission (CQC) is responsible for ensuring the quality of healthcare in England. To that end, CQC has developed statistical surveillance tools that periodically aggregate large numbers of quantitative performance measures to identify risks to the quality of care and prioritise its limited inspection resource. These tools have, however, failed to successfully identify poor-quality providers. Facing continued budget cuts, CQC is now further reliant on an 'intelligence-driven', risk-based approach to prioritising inspections and a new effective tool is required.
objectiveTo determine whether the near real-time, automated collection and aggregation of multiple sources of patient feedback can provide a collective judgement that effectively identifies risks to the quality of care, and hence can be used to help prioritise inspections.
methodsOur
resultsAggregating patient feedback increases the volume and diversity of patient-centred insights into the quality of care. There is a positive association between the resulting collective judgement score and subsequent inspection outcomes (OR for being rated 'Inadequate' compared with 'Requires improvement' 0.35 (95% CI 0.16 to 0.76), Requires improvement/Good OR 0.23 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.44), and Good/Outstanding OR 0.13 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.84), with p<0.05 for all).
conclusionsThe collective judgement score can successfully identify a high-risk group of organisations for inspection, is available in near real time and is available at a more granular level than the majority of existing data sets. The collective judgement score could therefore be used to help prioritise inspections.
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.