ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2025
The people-centered care and inpatients' perceived experience in China: a nationwide cross-sectional study.
Article in International journal for equity in health, 2025. 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.
- Development and practice of a standardized management pathway for chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in patients with gynecological malignancies.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Reliability and validity testing the Chinese version of the nursing surveillance scale: a cross-sectional study.BMC nursing · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe concept of People-Centered Care (PCC) is a prominent concept around the world, which is considered as an important concept and practice to promote health equity especially in China. Nevertheless, the association between PCC and the perceived experience of patients remains unclear, particularly from the perspective of the entire nation. This study examined the relationship between PCC and inpatients' perceived experience in China.
methodsThe study utilized nationwide data collected from 351 healthcare facilities in 31 provinces representing all facility levels and types using proportional odds models. The five attributes of PCC encompass the following categories: continuity of care, information sharing, enhanced access, effectiveness, and respect, each contributing to improving health equity. Inpatients' perceived experience includes the following factors: inpatients' satisfaction with the hospitalization, the recognition of the hospital, and the recommendation of the hospital.
resultsConcerning inpatients' overall satisfaction with the hospitalization, all PCC attributes had a positive effect on satisfaction, especially for inpatients with higher levels of care continuity and respect, contributing to health equity. Inpatients with a higher level of continuity were 3.66 times more likely to ameliorate their level of satisfaction from "very unsatisfied" to "unsatisfied." Meanwhile, all PCC attributes had significantly positive effects on inpatients' recognition, with effectiveness and respect showing an even stronger association with health equity. Regarding inpatients' recommendation measures, all PCC attributes were positively associated, especially with higher levels of care continuity and effectiveness.
conclusionPeople-centered care is positively associated with inpatients' perceived experience, and enhancing health equity through PCC attributes can further improve this experience. Further reform and practice should focus on the amelioration of continuity of care, promotion of information sharing between medical staff and patients, access and effectiveness of care, and respect for patients, all contributing to health equity.
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.