ArticleSaudi medical journal2020
Factors influencing patients' preferences for their treating physician.
Article in Saudi medical journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of accusations against physicians and the practice of defensive medicine between surgical and non-surgical specialties.PloS one · 2026Article
- Article
- Patient-Centred Gestational Diabetes Care: Preference Elicitation Methods and Machine Learning Innovations.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Review
- Review
- Exploring patient treatment decision making for osteoarthritis in the UAE: a cross-sectional adaptive choice-based conjoint study.BMC public health · 2023Article
- "To Be Treated as a Person and Not as a Disease Entity"-Expectations of People with Visual Impairments towards Primary Healthcare: Results of the Mixed-Method Survey in Poland.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Comment on: Patient physician communication.Saudi medical journal · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo explore preferences of the patients attending King Abdulaziz Medical City (KAMC), Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, in their treating physicians and to determine demographic and personal factors influencing their preferences.
methodsThrough a cross sectional design, 366 patients attending KAMC were systematically selected, and were requested to a pre-designed valid questionnaire. The study conducted between November 2017 and January 2018. The Statistical Package for Social Sciences was used for statistical analysis which included independent sample t-test, ANOVA and Pearson correlation. A p-value less than 0.05 was considered significant.
resultsThe study showed that females were significantly more preferring to get information, careful examination and receiving attention. Older respondents were interested in nding out how serious is their problem and having enough time for talking about their condition. Higher income respondents focused on necessity of physician caring for their personal situation. Highly educated individuals were concerned about getting enough information, and patients with chronic diseases were much interested by the truth of their condition. Each dimension of the personality traits was significantly correlated with different package of preferences in their treating physician.
conclusionRespondents' preferences in their treating physician are significantly influenced by their demographic characteristics as well as their personality traits. It is highly recommended that physicians, generally, should be attentive listener, informative while discussion, maintaining eye contact and showing interest and empathy for adult middle-aged patient. Also, to consider other preferable features based on patients' demographics and personalities.
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.