ArticleBMJ open quality2019
Patient's perspective on improving the quality of acute medical care: determining patient reported outcomes.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measuring experiences and outcomes of mental distress-related presentations to Australian emergency departments: lived experience perspectives.Health promotion international · 2025Article
- Influence of believed AI involvement on the perception of digital medical advice.Nature medicine · 2024Article
- From symptom onset to ED departure: understanding the acute care chain for patients with undifferentiated complaints: a prospective observational study.International journal of emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Clinical Acuity in the Emergency Department and Injury Severity Determine Hospital Admission of Older Patients with Low Energy Falls: Outcomes from a Prospective Feasibility Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Acting on better data for general medical care will help solve our acute hospital access crisis.The Medical journal of Australia · 2022Article
- Article
- Understanding what matters most to patients in acute care in seven countries, using the flash mob study design.BMC health services research · 2021Observational
- Patient and Partner Perspectives on Health-Related Quality of Life in Adrenocortical Carcinoma.Journal of the Endocrine Society · 2020Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
rationaleThere is an increasing societal demand for quality assurance and transparency of medical care. The American National Academy of Medicine has determined patient centredness as a quality domain for improvement of healthcare. While many of the current quality indicators are disease specific, most emergency department (ED) patients present with undifferentiated complaints. Therefore, there is a need for generic outcome measures. Our objective was to determine relevant patient reported outcomes (PROs) for quality measurement of acute care.
methodsWe conducted semistructured interviews in patients ≥18 years presenting at the ED for internal medicine. Patients with a cognitive impairment or language barrier were excluded. Interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis.
resultsThirty patients were interviewed. Patients reported outcomes as relevant in five domains: relief of symptoms, understanding the diagnosis, presence and understanding of the diagnostic and/or therapeutic plan, reassurance and patient experiences. Experiences were often mentioned as relevant to the perceived quality of care and appeared to influence the domain reassurance.
conclusionWe determined five domains of relevant PROs in acute care. These domains will be used for developing generic patient reported measures for acute care. The patients' perspective will be incorporated in these measures with the ultimate aim of organising truly patient-centred care at the ED.
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.