ArticleBMC health services research2023
Using patient comments from a standardised experience survey to investigate their perceptions and prioritise improvement actions: a thematic and syntactic analysis.
Article in BMC health services research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adapting quality function deployment to translate patient feedback into prioritized technical requirements for healthcare artificial intelligence.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Improving Patient Experience in Healthcare.Journal of Brown hospital medicine · 2025Review
- Sharing for Caring? A Patients' and Clinicians' View on Handling Personal Medical Data in the Context of Digitization: An Exploratory Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
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
backgroundAlthough patient experience surveys flourish in many countries with the aim to improve quality of care, questions remain concerning their ability to become effective drivers of change within institutions. The patient comments from the French national patient experience hospital survey were analysed using an innovative structured approach to characterise patient experience and identify field actions for the institutions.
methodsThe comments were taken from the two open-ended questions comprised in the patient experience survey of the Hospices Civils de Lyon between 2018 and 2019. The comments analysis methodology consisted in three steps: thematic analysis; syntactic analysis; generation of statistics for the creation of a patient journey and prioritisation of sub-themes. The STROBE statement checklist was followed.
resultsOver a year, 79.7% of the 7 362 respondents left at least one comment at the end of the survey and were included in the study, for a total of 5 868 surveys and 10 061 comments. These led to the identification of 28 general themes and 184 specific sub-themes. From the patient journey created, 23 sub-themes were prioritised and gathered into four key categories: relationship between patient and staff; environment; surgery and pain management; information and care coordination. For each of them, the actions and expectations formulated by the respondents were described.
conclusionsThe analysis of patient comments obtained from a standardised survey allowed to characterise the patient journey using data that describes patient experience, enabling a prioritisation of actions aiming to improve practice and quality of care at the institution, department, and staff level.
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.