Cited by 131Healthcare Operations and Scheduling OptimizationEmergency and Acute Care StudiesPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare

Non-attendance or non-invitation? A case-control study of failed outpatient appointments

Open access
Frankel, S., Farrow, A., West, R.·1989·BMJ

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the causes of non-attendance at new outpatient appointments. DESIGN: Case-control study of non-attenders and attenders. SETTING: Outpatient department of a general hospital. SUBJECTS: All non-attenders (n = 277) for first outpatient appointments in six specialties during a three month period were included. Controls (n = 135) were the attenders who followed every second non-attender; thus they attended the same consultant on the same day that the non-attenders were expected. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Information on the clinical problem, difficulties in attending the hospital, and reasons for non-attendance from the questionnaire were coded and classified. Non-attenders had received shorter notice of their appointment than attenders (14% v 1% had received three days' notice or less). There were small differences in the seriousness of patients' clinical condition. CONCLUSIONS: Client factors are less important than aspects of the service in explaining non-attendance at outpatient appointments.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.298.6684.1343

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. rhe Under Secretary of State for Health, Mr Patten, quoted in Russell W. Four million patients who failed to attend. Letter from Westminster. BrMedJ 1984;288:1928.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Frankel, S., Farrow, A., & West, R.
Affiliations
University of Wales (GB)
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1989-05-20
Volume
298
Issue
6684
Pages
1343-1345
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W2046379709
Cited by
131
References
13
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 5 · 2012: 7
FWCI
28.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Brunel University Research Archive (BURA) (Brunel University London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Healthcare Operations and Scheduling Optimization
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Emergency and Acute Care Studies
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Keywords
missed appointments, patient factors, health service factors, outpatient clinics
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Appointments and Schedules, Female, Hospitals, General, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Outpatient Clinics, Hospital, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Sex Factors, Time Factors, Wales

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