ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2021
Impact of primary care funding on patient satisfaction: a retrospective longitudinal study of English general practice, 2013-2016.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Patient-reported experiences and patient-reported experience measures in primary care, home care, and community settings. A scoping review.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2026Pooled it
- Does workforce explain the relationship between funding and patient experience? A mediation analysis of primary care data in England.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Ethical leadership and nurses' job performance: the mediating role of self-compassion.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Our role in making the Canadian health care system one of the world's best: How family medicine and primary care can transform-and bring the rest of the system with us.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2023Article
- GDP, CPI, RPI, and GPs: why economic indicators matter for GPs.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022Article
- Changes in public satisfaction with GP services in Britain between 1998 and 2019: a repeated cross-sectional analysis of attitudinal data.BMC primary care · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProviding high-quality clinical care and good patient experience are priorities for most healthcare systems.
aimTo understand the relationship between general practice funding and patient-reported experience. DESIGN AND
settingRetrospective longitudinal study of English general practice-level data for the financial years 2013-2014 to 2016-2017.
methodData for all general practices in England from the General and Personal Medical Services database were linked to patient experience data from the GP Patient Survey (GPPS). Panel data multivariate regression was used to estimate the impact of general practice funding (current or lagged 1 year) per patient on GPPS-reported patient experience of access, continuity of care, professionalism, and overall satisfaction. Confounding was controlled for by practice, demographic, and GPPS responder characteristics, and for year effects.
resultsInflation-adjusted mean total annual funding per patient was £133.66 (standard deviation [SD] = £39.46). In all models, higher funding was associated with better patient experience. In the model with lagged funding and practice fixed effects (model 6), a 1 SD increase in funding was associated with increases in scores in the domains of access (1.18%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.89 to 1.47), continuity (0.86%; 95% CI = 0.19 to 1.52), professionalism of GP (0.47%; 95% CI = 0.22 to 0.71), professionalism of nurse (0.51%; 95% CI = 0.24 to 0.77), professionalism of receptionist (0.51%; 95% CI = 0.24 to 0.78), and in overall satisfaction (0.88%; 95% CI = 0.52 to 1.24).
conclusionBetter-funded general practices were more likely to have higher reported patient experience ratings across a wide range of domains.
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.