Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42688102›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026

Patient satisfaction with emergency department services in selected Saudi hospitals: a cross-sectional study.

Maha Altewerki, Salah Alshagrawi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Maha AltewerkiDepartment of Public Health, Saudi Electronic University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Salah AlshagrawiDepartment of Public Health, Saudi Electronic University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Patient satisfaction is an important indicator of healthcare quality and patient-centered care, particularly in emergency department (ED) settings. This study aimed to assess patient satisfaction with ED services and identify service quality factors associated with overall patient satisfaction among patients attending selected government and private hospitals in Saudi Arabia. Methods: A cross-sectional study using a convenience sampling approach was conducted between April 5 and April 23, 2026, among adult patients attending the EDs of eight government and private hospitals, including five government hospitals and three private hospitals, across the Central, Western, and Eastern regions of Saudi Arabia. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire assessing satisfaction across multiple service quality domains, including waiting time, staff availability, patient involvement and communication, clarity of explanations, cleanliness, respect, and comfort. Descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation analysis, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), and hierarchical multiple regression analysis were performed. Results: A total of 313 participants completed the survey (response rate: 78.3%). Waiting time received the lowest satisfaction rating ( Conclusion: Patient satisfaction with ED services was associated with both operational and interpersonal aspects of care. Although waiting time was the lowest-rated domain, staff availability, comfort, and cleanliness demonstrated the strongest associations with overall satisfaction. Staff availability and responsiveness, comfort, and cleanliness emerged as important domains associated with overall patient satisfaction and may represent priority targets for future quality-improvement initiatives in Saudi Arabia.

Indexed as

emergency departmenthealthcare qualitypatient-centered carepatient experiencepatient satisfactionwaiting time

Identifiers

PMID42688102
PMCPMC13533912

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.