ArticlePatient preference and adherence2023
Empowering Healthcare Through User Feedback: A Multidimensional Analysis of the Knowledge.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Received Knowledge of Care as Evaluated by Patients and Their Significant Others: A Feedback-Register Study.Scandinavian journal of caring sciences · 2025Observational
- The Quality of Fundamental Care as Perceived by Nurses and Patients in a Hospital Setting: A Descriptive Comparative Study.Nursing open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Feedback from service users is a valuable source for improving the quality of care and services, potentially reflecting the successes and failures in providing empowering healthcare. In supporting empowerment, the multidimensionality of knowledge of service users is assumed to be a crucial factor, yet feedback has not been explored from the perspective of empowering knowledge. In this study, the aim was to analyze the knowledge areas expressed in the service users' feedback from the point of view of empowering knowledge. Patients and Methods: This was a retrospective study utilizing systematically collected service-user feedback from a feedback register of one university hospital district in Finland. Free-form feedback (n = 26,374) along with structured evaluative feedback was given by the patients themselves or their significant others, either by text message or using a feedback form, in 2019. The content of the feedback was analyzed according to the empowering knowledge areas (biophysiological, cognitive, functional, experiential, ethical, social, and financial), quantified, and analyzed statistically in relation to the background characteristics of service users. Results: Service users gave multidimensional free-form feedback about the knowledge and educational practices in care and services. In the free-form feedback, the most common empowering knowledge areas were biophysiological and cognitive ones, whilst experiential, ethical, social, and financial areas were the least common. The highest ratings of structured evaluative feedback were associated with the cognitive and ethical areas. Conclusion: Register-based feedback is systematic data for quality evaluation. In this study, service users seem to actively evaluate the knowledge procession in care and services, and therefore, they can be actors involved in developing the quality of educational practices. It does, however, indicate a need to add multidimensionality and improve the quality of the knowledge, and by that, advance the potential of empowerment among diverse service users.
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.