Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36856813›Full record

ArticleFamily practice2023

Feedback reports to the general practitioner (GP) on the patients' experiences: are GPs interested, and is this interest associated with GP factors and patient experience scores?

Øyvind A Bjertnæs, Rebecka M Norman, Torunn B Eide, Olaf Holmboe, Hilde H Iversen, Kjetil Telle, Jose M Valderas

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Family practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Quality improvement work in general practice; a Norwegian focus group study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2024
    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 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Øyvind A BjertnæsDepartment of Health Services Research, Division for Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo 0473, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-4261-5455
Rebecka M NormanDepartment of Health Services Research, Division for Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo 0473, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-7503-2048
Torunn B EideDepartment of General Practice, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-5712-1415
Olaf HolmboeDepartment of Health Services Research, Division for Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo 0473, Norway.
Hilde H IversenDepartment of Health Services Research, Division for Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo 0473, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-6191-416X
Kjetil TelleDepartment of Health Services Research, Division for Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo 0473, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-7978-0825
Jose M ValderasDepartment of Family Medicine, National University Health System, Level 9, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-9299-1555
Norwegian Institute of Public Health · NONational University Health System · SGUniversity of Oslo · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient experience feedback is key in patient centred health systems, but empirical evidence of general practitioner (GP) interest in it is sparse. We aimed to: (i) quantitatively estimate the level of GP interest for feedback reports on patient experience; (ii) explore determinants of such interest; and (iii) examine potential association between a priori interest and patient experience.

methodsThe patient experience survey included maximum 300 randomly selected patients for each of 50 randomly selected GPs (response rate 41.4%, n = 5,623). GPs were sent a postal letter offering feedback reports and were grouped according to their replies: (i) interested in the report; (ii) not interested. Associations between interest and GP variables were assessed with Chi-square tests and multivariate logistic regression, while associations between interest and scores for 5 patient experiences scales were assessed with multilevel regression models.

resultsAbout half (n = 21; 45.7%) of the GPs showed interest in the report by asking to receive the report. The only GP variable associated with a priori interest was being a specialist in general practice (58.6% vs. 23.5% for those without) (P = 0.021). Interest was significantly associated with the practice patient experience scale (4.1 higher score compared with those not interested, P = 0.048). Interest in the report had small and nonsignificant associations with the remaining patient experience scales.

conclusionsAlmost half of the GPs, and almost 3 in 5 of specialists in general practice, were interested in receiving a GP-specific feedback report on patient experiences. Interest in the report was generally not related to patient experience scores.

Indexed as

General PracticeGeneral PractitionersFamily PracticeFeedbackHumansPatient Outcome AssessmentSurveys and Questionnairesgeneral practicegeneral practitionerhealth care surveyspatient satisfactionphysician–patient relationsquality improvement

Identifiers

PMID36856813
PMCPMC10745253
OpenAlexW4322718529

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.