The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quality of care from the patients' perspective: from theoretical concept to a new measuring instrument
Open accessAbstract
Introduction: Patient views on quality of care are of paramount importance with respect to the implementation of quality assurance (QA) and improvement (QI) programmes. However, the relevance of patient satisfaction studies is often questioned because of conceptual and methodological problems. Here, it is our belief that a different strategy is necessary. Objective: To develop a conceptual framework for measuring quality of care seen through the patients' eyes, based on the existing literature on consumer satisfaction in health care and business research. Results: Patient or consumer satisfaction is regarded as a multidimensional concept, based on a relationship between experiences and expectations. However, where most health care researchers tend to concentrate on the result, patient (dis)satisfaction, a more fruitful approach is to look at the basic components of the concept: expectations (or `needs') and experiences. A conceptual framework – based on the sequence performance, importance, impact – and quality judgements of different categories of patients derived from importance and performance scores of different health care aspects, is elaborated upon and illustrated with empirical evidence. Conclusions: The new conceptual model, with quality of care indices derived from importance and performance scores, can serve as a framework for QA and QI programmes from the patients' perspective. For selecting quality of care aspects, a category‐specific approach is recommended including the use of focus group discussions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
SERVQUAL: A multiple-Item Scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L., & Zeithaml, V. A. (1988) · Zenodo · doi:10.5281/zenodo.14579729 · Cited by 21,118
A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions
Oliver, R. L. (1980) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378001700405 · Cited by 14,494
Qualitative research. Introducing focus groups.
Kitzinger, J. (1995) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.311.7000.299 · Cited by 6,939
Evaluating the quality of medical care
DONABEDIAN, A. (2005) · The Milbank Quarterly · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0009.2005.00397.x · Cited by 6,102
Donabedian, A. (1988) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.260.12.1743 · Cited by 5,895
The methodology of Focus Groups: the importance of interaction between research participants
Kitzinger, J. (1994) · Sociology of Health & Illness · doi:10.1111/1467-9566.ep11347023 · Cited by 3,870
Meta-analysis of correlates of provider behavior in medical encounters
Hall, J. A., Roter, D. L., & Katz, N. R. (1988) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-198807000-00002 · Cited by 1,069
Midwives in Niger: an uncomfortable position between social behaviours and health care constraints
Jaffre, Y., & Prual, A. (1994) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/0277-9536(94)90224-0 · Cited by 71
Cited by
The Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA): rationale, objectives and methods
Penninx, B. W. J. H., Beekman, A. T. F., Smit, J. H., Zitman, F. G., Nolen, W. A., Spinhoven, P., Cuijpers, P., De Jong, P. J., Van Marwijk, H. W. J., Assendelft, W. J. J., et al. (2008) · International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research · doi:10.1002/mpr.256 · Cited by 927
Determinants of patient satisfaction: a systematic review
Batbaatar, E., Dorjdagva, J., Luvsannyam, A., Savino, M. M., & Amenta, P. (2017) · Perspectives in Public Health · doi:10.1177/1757913916634136 · Cited by 865
Instruments to measure patient experience of healthcare quality in hospitals: a systematic review
Beattie, M., Murphy, D. J., Atherton, I., & Lauder, W. (2015) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/s13643-015-0089-0 · Cited by 438
Patient satisfaction revisited: A multilevel approach
Hekkert, K. D., Cihangir, S., Kleefstra, S. M., van den Berg, B., & Kool, R. B. (2009) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.04.016 · Cited by 311
Reasons and determinants for not receiving treatment for common mental disorders
van Beljouw, I., Verhaak, P., Prins, M., Cuijpers, P., Penninx, B., & Bensing, J. (2010) · Psychiatric Services · doi:10.1176/ps.2010.61.3.250 · Cited by 143
Metadata
- Authors
- Sixma, H. J., Kerssens, J. J., Campen, C. V., & Peters, L.
- Venue
- Health Expectations
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1998-11
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 82-95
- ISSN
- 1369-6513 (ISSN-L)
- 1369-7625
- OpenAlex
- W2110739599
- Cited by
- 343
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 10.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quality of care from the patients' perspective: from theoretical concept to a new measuring instrument. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1369-6513.1998.00004.x
- The paper
- Sixma, H. J., Kerssens, J. J., Campen, C. V., & Peters, L. (1998). Quality of care from the patients' perspective: from theoretical concept to a new measuring instrument. Health Expectations. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1369-6513.1998.00004.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.