Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37167452›Full record

ReviewThe Milbank quarterly2023

Measuring Trust in Primary Care.

Zachary Merenstein, Jill C Shuemaker, Robert L Phillips

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Milbank quarterly, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Approaching Social Determinants of Health in Otolaryngology - Head Neck Surgery: Linking Needs to Resources to Promote Health Equity.ORL-head and neck nursing : official journal of the Society of Otorhinolaryngology and Head-Neck Nurses · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. 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

3 authors.

Zachary MerensteinUniversity of Maryland.
Jill C ShuemakerAmerican Board of Family Medicine Foundation, The Center for Professionalism & Value in Health Care.
Robert L PhillipsAmerican Board of Family Medicine Foundation, The Center for Professionalism & Value in Health Care.ORCID 0000-0001-7882-1560

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Policy Points Trust in primary care clinicians is essential for effective patient care and is associated with better health outcomes, but it is rarely assessed, and existing measures have not been thoroughly evaluated. This scoping review reveals that research assessing patients' trust in primary care clinicians largely stopped more than a decade ago but offers candidate measures for future testing, implementation, and policy applications. CONTEXT: Trust is a fundamental aspect of any human relationship, and medical care is no exception. An ongoing, trusting relationship between clinicians and patients has shown demonstrable value to primary care. However, there is currently no measure of trust in general use, and none endorsed for use by most value-based payment programs. This review searched the literature for any existing measures of patient trust in primary care clinicians and assessed their potential to be implemented as a patient-reported outcome measure.

methodsA keyword search on PubMed along with scanning references was conducted to find any trust measures in health care. Measures that did not address primary care clinicians were eliminated and the remaining measures were then assessed for their utility to primary care.

resultsThis purposeful, scoping review found four tested measures for assessing patients' trust in primary care clinicians that are candidates for general use. Of these four, the revised Trust in Physicians Scale and Wake Forest Physician Trust Scale are the most tested and viable options.

conclusionRenewed national interest in trust in health care should focus on the capacity to measure it. This review informs the effort to test trust measures for use in research, practice improvement, and value-based payment. Measuring trust, how it relates to outcomes, and learning how it is produced or lost are key to assisting practices and health systems toward earning it.

Indexed as

PhysiciansTrustHumansPrimary Health Caremeasurementprimary carequality measurestrust

Identifiers

PMID37167452
PMCPMC10509519

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.