Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35101052›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2022

Evaluation of primary care responsiveness by people with mental illness in Spain.

Valle Coronado-Vázquez, María Josefa Gil-de-Gómez, Eva Rodríguez-Eguizábal, Bárbara Oliván-Blázquez, Juan Gómez-Salgado, Rosa Magallón-Botaya, María Antonia Sánchez-Calavera

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Valle Coronado-VázquezAragonese Institute for Health Sciences (IACS), 50009, Zaragoza, Spain.
María Josefa Gil-de-GómezAragonese Institute for Health Sciences (IACS), 50009, Zaragoza, Spain.
Eva Rodríguez-EguizábalAragonese Institute for Health Sciences (IACS), 50009, Zaragoza, Spain.
Bárbara Oliván-BlázquezGroup B21-20R, Health Research Institute of Aragon (IIS), 50009, Zaragoza, Spain.
Juan Gómez-SalgadoDepartment of Sociology, Social Work and Public Health. Campus El Carmen, Universidad de Huelva, Av. de 3 de Marzo, 21007, Huelva, Spain. jgsalgad@gmail.com.
Rosa Magallón-BotayaGroup B21-20R, Health Research Institute of Aragon (IIS), 50009, Zaragoza, Spain.
María Antonia Sánchez-CalaveraGroup B21-20R, Health Research Institute of Aragon (IIS), 50009, Zaragoza, Spain.
Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Aragón · ESHospital San Pedro · ESMadrid Health Service · ESRed de Investigación en Actividades Preventivas y Promoción de la Salud · ESUniversidad de Huelva · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe health system responsiveness is a concept developed by the World Health Organization that measures patients' expectations for the non-medical care they receive. The aim of this study is to assess primary care responsiveness as seen by people with mental illness and to analyse the factors associated with poor responsiveness.

methodsCross-sectional descriptive study on 426 people with mental illness who had attended primary care consultations at least once in the previous 12 months. The responsiveness of the health system was determined through the short questionnaire "Multi-country Survey Study on Health and Health Systems Responsiveness". Differences in responsiveness by sociodemographic characteristics were compared through the Chi-squared test. Logistic regression identified the factors associated with poor responsiveness.

resultsOverall responsiveness was measured as good by 77.4% of patients, being this probability higher in the domains: dignity, confidentiality, and communication. The most valued domains by people with mental illness were prompt attention (42.4%), dignity (30.1%), and communication (17%). Only prompt attention scored high importance and poor responsiveness. In patients with an income lower than 900 euros per month and low level of studies, the probability of poor confidentiality responsiveness was multiplied by 3 and 2.7 respectively.

conclusionsPeople with mental illness perceive good responsiveness from primary care in terms of dignity, confidentiality, and communication. Prompt attention, as the domain of greatest importance and worst valuation, should be prioritised through the implementation of organisational measures in health centres to reduce waiting times, especially in urban areas.

Indexed as

Mental DisordersPatient SatisfactionCross-Sectional StudiesHumansPrimary Health CareSpainMental illnessPrimary careResponsiveness

Identifiers

PMID35101052
PMCPMC8805273
OpenAlexW4210583126

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.