ArticleBMC health services research2025
Stakeholders' experiences, perceptions and satisfaction with an electronic appointment system: a qualitative content analysis.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient and carer perceptions and experiences of technology-facilitated appointment reminders in healthcare: a scoping review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026Article
- Psychometric evaluation of acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility measures for a students' online health appointment system in a university hospital in Ghana.Implementation science communications · 2026Article
- Exploring the relationship between supervisory support, self-efficacy, and satisfaction among nursing students in Saudi Arabia.PloS one · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
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
backgroundOnline appointment scheduling systems have been designed and implemented to address barriers and problems related to in-person appointment scheduling; however, these systems also face challenges and issues that require continuous evaluation and resolution. This research aimed to investigate the experiences, perceptions and satisfaction of stakeholders with an electronic appointment system and identify its problems.
methodsThis was a qualitative study conducted at a specialty Clinic in Iran during 2022-2023. A systematic purposive sampling method was used to select the participants. The participants included 10 administrative and executive users working at the Specialty Clinic, 8 physicians working at the clinic and 18 patients and visitors to the clinic. Data was collected through semi-structured face-to-face interviews. The interviews were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.
resultsThe findings derived from the semi-structured interview data revealed that the problems with the appointment system fell into two main themes: "Problems Related to Planning and Management of the Electronic Appointment System" and "Non-managerial Problems of the Electronic Appointment System". The problems related to planning and management were divided into three categories: national-level system management, university-level system management and clinic-level system management. The non-managerial problems were classified into two groups: functional problems and non-functional problems.
conclusionsThe results of this study showed that the electronic appointment system, despite facilitating appointment processes, can be influenced by various factors and lead to stakeholder dissatisfaction. Planning, management and policymaking have a significant impact on the appointment process of healthcare centers and attention to the problems arising from it is of particular importance. Moreover, if the functional and non-functional requirements of appointment systems are unclear, the system will face many challenges.
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.