ArticleMedical care2026
The Patient Experience Divide: How Income Relates to Care Quality in the Primary Care Setting.
Article in Medical care, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIncome is closely linked to morbidity and mortality in the United States, potentially due in part to differences in patient experience. However, existing studies on income and care experiences are outdated and have other important limitations.
methodsUsing data from a recent national sample of adults (N=5016), we conducted a mixed-methods investigation of the relationship between income and primary care experiences. Patient experience was measured using the CAHPS Clinician and Group survey (CG-CAHPS) and its associated Narrative Item Set (NIS). Closed-ended responses were used to create 4 composite measures, for example, access to care, while open-ended NIS responses were coded for positive and negative mentions of 7 aspects of care: access, coordination, communication, office staff, efficiency, thoroughness, and emotional rapport.
resultsContingent on mentioning an aspect of care in their narratives, low-income participants had lower unadjusted odds of making positive mentions of access, coordination, communication, office staff, efficiency, and emotional rapport (all P- values ≤0.02). Conversely, they had higher unadjusted odds of making negative mentions of coordination, communication, efficiency, and thoroughness (all P -values ≤0.006). Patterns were similar after controlling for education and other characteristics. Low-income participants also had scores on all CG-CAHPS composite measures that were 3-5 points lower than scores for higher-income participants (all P- values <0.001).
conclusionLow-income patients report fewer positive and more negative health care experiences than higher-income patients across multiple aspects of care. These deficits may contribute to their higher morbidity and mortality. Further research is needed to uncover underlying causes and inform policies and practices to ensure high-quality care for all patients.
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.