ArticlePatient related outcome measures2020
The Use of the Net Promoter Score (NPS) in an Outpatient Allergy and Pulmonary Clinic: An Innovative Look into Using Tablet-Based Tool vs Traditional Survey Method.
Article in Patient related outcome measures, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- The ultimate question? Evaluating the use of Net Promoter Score in healthcare: A systematic review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Pooled it
- Proactively Delivered Digital Mental Health Support for Health Care Workers: Usability and Acceptability Evaluation.JMIR formative research · 2025Trial
- Experiences of participants with undiagnosed diseases and hereditary cancers during the initial phase of the Hong Kong genome project: a mixed-methods study.Human genomics · 2025Article
- Article
- Review
- Early Peanut Immunotherapy in Children (EPIC) trial: protocol for a pragmatic randomised controlled trial of peanut oral immunotherapy in children under 5 years of age.BMJ paediatrics open · 2023Article
- Assessments of and Attitudes towards Specialist Teleconsultations among Nephrology and Posttransplant Outpatients during the COVID-19 Pandemic.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- An online platform for COVID-19 diagnostic screening using a machine learning algorithm.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2023Article
- An Integrated, Multimodal, Digital Health Solution for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Prospective Observational Pilot Study.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
- Do Patient Experiences Have Mediating Roles on Patient Loyalty?Journal of patient experience · 2022Article
- Net Promoter Score (NPS) as a tool to assess parental satisfaction in pediatric intensive care units.Jornal de pediatriaArticle
- 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPatient satisfaction has become an essential metric in addition to the type of care they receive. Phone calls, emails, and text to patients after their healthcare visit are the typical way of obtaining the data reflecting patient satisfaction. The purpose of this retrospective quality improvement study is to compare the traditional post-outpatient clinic survey method with an onsite concise two-question survey using a tablet method immediately after the patient visit using Net Promoter Score (NPS) questions.
methodsData were collected retrospectively from February to August 2018 from an outpatient subspecialty clinic in southern California using an existing database from two different sources: the traditional method (TM) and the tablet-based tool (TBT), using NPS. The TM data were obtained from a third-party company using two questions via phone, email, and text collected 2-4 weeks after the patient's visit. The TBT has only two questions that were given to patients upon their visit check-out. These two questions assessed both provider and clinic's performance using the NPS method.
resultsIn total, there were 1708 patients seen from February to August 2018. In the TM, the total outgoing messages during this period were 580 (34.0%) with 156 responses (27%). In the TBT, 648 out of 1708 (37.9%) surveys were collected with a 100% response rate. The NPS score showed that 99.2% of the providers were promoters. The NPS score for the clinic was 96% which reflects a promoter score.
conclusionOur results indicate that when using the TBT immediately after their visit to the clinic, a higher response rate was noted. In addition, both methods had similar outcomes in terms of patient satisfaction NPS scores. Future prospective studies with a larger sample size are warranted to evaluate the effectiveness of the TBT tool in assessing patient satisfaction.
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.