Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31542764›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

Patient experience of hospital care in China: major findings from the Chinese Patient Experience Questionnaire Survey (2016-2018).

Guangyu Hu, Yin Chen, Qiannan Liu, Shichao Wu, Jing Guo, Shiyang Liu, Zijuan Wang, Pengyu Zhao, Jing Sun, Linlin Hu and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Can Patients Co-Create Value in an Online Healthcare Platform? An Examination of Value Co-Creation.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

16 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Guangyu HuInstitute of Medical Information/Center for Health Policy and Management, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-0339-4522
Yin ChenPeking University International Hospital, Beijing, China.
Qiannan LiuNational Institute of Hospital Administration, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-9230-6650
Shichao WuSchool of Public Health, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Jing GuoSchool of Public Health, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Shiyang LiuSchool of Public Health, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Zijuan WangSchool of Public Health, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Pengyu ZhaoSchool of Public Health, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Jing SunSchool of Public Health, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-4646-1174
Linlin HuSchool of Public Health, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Huixuan ZhouSchool of Public Health, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Li LuoSchool of Public Health, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Ying MaoSchool of Public Policy and Administration, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.
Jack NeedlemanDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Fielding School of Public Health, UCLA, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Jing MaDepartment of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA jing_ma@harvardpilgrim.org liuyl_fpo@126.com.
Yuanli LiuSchool of Public Health, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China jing_ma@harvardpilgrim.org liuyl_fpo@126.com.ORCID 0000-0002-5559-1149
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNFudan University · CNHarvard University · USNational Institute of Hospital Administration · CNPeking University · CNUCLA Health · USXi'an Jiaotong University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesChina launched the National Healthcare Improvement Initiative (NHII) in 2015 to improve patient experiences in healthcare. This study aimed to generate evidence of hospital care quality from the patients' perspective.

designThis nationwide cross-sectional study interviewed participants from 31 provinces, municipalities and autonomous regions across China.

settingA total of 117 tertiary hospitals in mainland China.

participants48 422 responses from outpatients and 35 957 responses from inpatients were included in this study. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: The scores of six predefined domains in the Chinese Patient Experience Questionnaire, five of which were designed to reflect specific dimensions of care, and one of which indicated the overall rating.

resultsMore than 80% of the respondents viewed their care experiences as positive. The NHII seems to have had a positive impact, as indicated by the steady, although unremarkable, increase in the patient experience scores over the 2016-2018 period. The Chinese patients generally reported a positive experience with the clinical aspects of care, but reported a less positive experience with the environmental, interpersonal and social services aspects of care. The institutional factors, including region and type of hospital, and personal factors, such as gender, age, education and occupation, were factors affecting the patient experience in China. Humanistic care was the aspect of care with the greatest association with the overall patient experience rating in both the outpatient and inpatient settings.

conclusionsThe national survey indicated an overall positive patient perspective of care in China. Older age, higher education level and formal employment status were found to be correlated with positive care experiences, as were higher levels of economic development of the region, a more generous insurance benefits package and a higher degree of coordinated care. The interpersonal-related initiatives had substantial roles in the improvement of the patient experience. In the regions where farmers and users of traditional Chinese medicine services constitute a greater proportion of the population, improvement of patient experiences for these groups deserves special policy attention.

Indexed as

Patient SatisfactionQuality ImprovementAdultChinaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHospitalsHumansMaleMiddle AgedQuality of Health CareSelf Reporthealth policypatient experiencequality in healthcare

Identifiers

PMID31542764
PMCPMC6756435
OpenAlexW2974747702

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.