ReviewJournal of family medicine and primary care2025
Trends of consultation time, waiting time, and satisfaction in family medicine/primary health care centers in Saudi Arabia: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Consultation and waiting times are critical determinants of patient satisfaction and healthcare efficiency in primary care settings. This study aims to systematically review and analyze consultation time trends, waiting time variations, and their impact on patient satisfaction in family medicine and primary health care (PHC) centers in Saudi Arabia. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Data were collected from electronic databases from 1990 to 2024. Studies included cross-sectional, cohort, and observational designs that examined consultation and waiting times in Saudi PHC settings. The Joanna Briggs Institute assessed study quality. Extracted data were consultation duration, waiting time, patient demographics, facility types, and satisfaction levels. The review analyzed 19 studies with 1,030,570 participants. In-person consultations lasted 5 to 10 minutes, virtual ones averaged 8 minutes, and telephone consultations took about 10 minutes. Urban PHC had an average wait time of 30.4 minutes, while rural settings reported 6 minutes. Longer consultations correlated with higher patient satisfaction and effectiveness. The meta-analysis estimated a pooled consultation time of 9.16 minutes, with significant heterogeneity (I
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.