Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29968180›Full record

ArticleThe patient2019

Understanding 'Good Health care' from the Patient's Perspective: Development of a Conceptual Model Using Group Concept Mapping.

Stacey A McCaffrey, Emil Chiauzzi, Caroline Chan, Michael Hoole

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The patient, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Patient perspectives on quality of care for depression and anxiety in primary health care teams: A qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
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.

Stacey A McCaffreyPatientsLikeMe, Inc, 160 Second St, Cambridge, MA, 02142, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0130-7218
Emil ChiauzziPatientsLikeMe, Inc, 160 Second St, Cambridge, MA, 02142, USA. echiauzzi@patientslikeme.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4995-7308
Caroline ChanPatientsLikeMe, Inc, 160 Second St, Cambridge, MA, 02142, USA.
Michael HoolePatientsLikeMe, Inc, 160 Second St, Cambridge, MA, 02142, USA.

Funding

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation grant 73040
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is an increasing focus on measuring performance indicators of health care providers, but there is a lack of patient input into what defines 'good care.'

objectiveThe primary objective was to develop a conceptual model of 'good health care' from the patient's perspective. Exploratory analyses were also conducted to investigate (1) differences in patient priorities based on demographic and clinical factors, and (2) differences between patients and health stakeholders (e.g., clinicians, researchers) with respect to patient health care priorities.

methodThese objectives were accomplished using group concept mapping. Following statement generation, PatientsLikeMe members, Baltimore community members recruited through a university-affiliated clinic, and stakeholders individually sorted the statements into meaningful categories and rated the statements with respect to importance. Qualitative and quantitative analyses generated a final conceptual model.

resultsOne hundred and fifty-seven patients and 17 stakeholders provided input during statement generation. The 1779-statement pool was reduced to 79 statements for the structuring (sorting and rating) activities. In total, 221 patients and 16 stakeholders completed structuring activities through group concept mapping software. Results yielded a 10-cluster solution, and patient priorities were found to be relatively invariant across demographic/clinical groups. Results were also similar between patients and stakeholders.

conclusionsThis comprehensive qualitative and quantitative investigation is an important first step in developing patient-reported outcome performance measures that capture the aspects of health care that are most important and relevant for patients. Limitations and future directions are discussed.

Indexed as

Concept FormationPatient SatisfactionQuality of Health CareAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBaltimoreFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID29968180
PMCPMC6335377

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.