ArticleBMJ open2026
Who complains? A nationwide register-based cross-sectional study of socioeconomic differences in patient complaints and complaint case outcomes in Denmark.
Article in BMJ open, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine socioeconomic and demographic differences in who complains about healthcare and whether these factors are associated with the outcomes of complaint cases.
designNationwide cross-sectional study in Denmark using linked national health, complaint and administrative registers.
settingThe Danish healthcare system provides universal coverage and has a centralised system for handling complaints with linked patient-level data to sociodemographic variables.
participantsAll healthcare contacts in 2022 in general practice (GP), non-psychiatric hospitals and psychiatric hospitals were included. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: We examined two outcomes: (1) submission of a complaint and (2) whether the authorities upheld the complaint. We then assessed how these outcomes varied by socioeconomic position (SEP), focusing on the contrast between patients with the lowest and highest SEP profiles. Relative risks (RRs) were estimated using modified Poisson regression with cluster-robust variance estimation at the patient level.
resultsThere were 31.9 million GP contacts, 4.8 million non-psychiatric hospital contacts and 345 000 psychiatric contacts, with 1381, 3545 and 439 complaints, respectively (0.43-12.7 per 10 000 contacts). Clear socioeconomic disparities emerged. Low-income patients were more likely to complain about GP and non-psychiatric hospitals, while higher education was associated with fewer complaints in these settings but more complaints about psychiatry. Patients outside the workforce were more likely to complain, whereas elderly patients were consistently underrepresented in the complaints.Low-SEP profiles had notably higher complaint probabilities than high-SEP profiles in GP (RR 2.60, 95% CI 2.22 to 3.70) and non-psychiatric hospitals (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.40 to 1.98), but not in psychiatric hospitals (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.38). Although individual SEP indicators showed no consistent differences in complaint outcomes, the combined SEP profiles revealed lower probabilities for complaints being upheld in lower SEP patients in GP (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.94) and non-psychiatric hospitals (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.96), while the estimate for psychiatric hospitals was inconclusive (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.66).
conclusionsIn this nationwide study, socioeconomic and demographic factors were linked to clear differences in both complaint submission and complaint outcomes. Except for psychiatric hospital services, patients with fewer socioeconomic resources were more likely to file a complaint yet had a lower probability of having it upheld. These findings point to disparities in who complains and in how complaints are assessed, and they underline the need to consider all complaints, regardless of outcome, when using complaint data to inform quality improvement efforts.
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.