Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33256725›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2020

Patient experiences with general practice in Norway: a comparison of immigrant groups and the majority population following a national survey.

Marte Kjøllesdal, Thor Indseth, Hilde Hestad Iversen, Oyvind Bjertnaes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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.

Marte KjøllesdalNorwegian Institute of Public Health, Health Services Research, Postboks 222 Skøyen, 0213, Oslo, Norway. makj@fhi.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5223-711X
Thor IndsethNorwegian Institute of Public Health, Health Services Research, Postboks 222 Skøyen, 0213, Oslo, Norway.
Hilde Hestad IversenNorwegian Institute of Public Health, Health Services Research, Postboks 222 Skøyen, 0213, Oslo, Norway.
Oyvind BjertnaesNorwegian Institute of Public Health, Health Services Research, Postboks 222 Skøyen, 0213, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient experience is an important indicator of quality of health care. In Norway, little is known about the quality of health care for immigrants. The aim of this study was to compare patient-reported experiences with general practice between the Norwegian-born population and immigrant groups.

methodsWe performed secondary analyses of data from a national survey on patient experiences with general practice, including assessments of general practitioners (GPs) and their GP offices. The survey was carried out in Norway in 2018-19. The total number of respondents was 2029, with a response rate of 42.6%. Region of birth was available for 1981 participants, and these were included in the analyses ("Norway" (N = 1756), "Asia, Africa or South America" (N = 95), "Eastern Europe" (N = 70) and "Western Europe, North America or Oceania" (N = 60)). Five indicators of patient experiences were used as dependent variables in bivariate and multivariate analyses, with region of birth as the main exposure variable and other background variables about the patient as adjustment variables: "the GP" (measures related to communication and competency), "auxiliary staff" (politeness, competency, organization), "accessibility" (waiting times), "coordination" (with other services) and `enablement` (GP facilitates coping with/understanding illness).

resultsImmigrants as a whole reported poorer experiences with general practice than the majority population, with significantly poorer scores on four of five patient experience indicators. Patients from Asia/Africa/South America reported poorer experiences than those from Norway on the indicators "GP", "auxiliary staff", "accessibility" and "coordination": on a scale from 0 to 100 where 100 is the best, the difference ranged from 7.8 (GP) to 20.3 (accessibility). Patients from Eastern Europe reported lower scores on "GP" and patients from Western Europe/North America/Oceania reported lower scores on "auxiliary staff". These associations were still significant after adjustment for sex, age, self-rated physical and mental health, number of contacts with the GP and education.

conclusionsFor countries with a substantial proportion of foreign-born patients in the health system, immigrant background is an important parameter in quality improvement work. Immigrant background is also an important parameter in health service research.

Indexed as

Emigrants and ImmigrantsGeneral PracticeAfricaAsiaEuropeEurope, EasternFemaleHumansNorth AmericaNorwayPatient Outcome AssessmentPregnancySouth AmericaGPImmigrantsNational surveyNorwayPatient experiences

Identifiers

PMID33256725
PMCPMC7708102

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.