The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The measurement of satisfaction with healthcare: implications for practice from a systematic review of the literature
Open accessAbstract
Summaries are available from the NCCHTA website (see opposite). NHS R&D HTA ProgrammeT he NHS R&D Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme was set up in 1993 to ensure that high-quality research information on the costs, effectiveness and broader impact of health technologies is produced in the most efficient way for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS.Initially, six HTA panels (pharmaceuticals, acute sector, primary and community care, diagnostics and imaging, population screening, methodology) helped to set the research priorities for the HTA Programme.However, during the past few years there have been a number of changes in and around NHS R&D, such as the establishment of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) and the creation of three new research programmes: Service Delivery and Organisation (SDO); New and Emerging Applications of Technology (NEAT); and the Methodology Programme.Although the National Coordinating Centre for Health Technology Assessment (NCCHTA) commissions research on behalf of the Methodology Programme, it is the Methodology Group that now considers and advises the Methodology Programme Director on the best research projects to pursue.
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
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
Integrating response shift into health-related quality of life research: a theoretical model
Sprangers, M. A. G., & Schwartz, C. E. (1999) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0277-9536(99)00045-3 · Cited by 2,228
Qualitative research methods in health technology assessment: a review of the literature.
Murphy, Dingwall, Greatbatch, Parker, & Watson (1998) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta2160 · Cited by 1,107
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
Doctor–patient communication and the quality of care
Bensing, J. (1991) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/0277-9536(91)90047-g · Cited by 407
Cited by
Interventions for enhancing medication adherence
Nieuwlaat, R., Wilczynski, N., Navarro, T., Hobson, N., Jeffery, R., Keepanasseril, A., Agoritsas, T., Mistry, N., Iorio, A., Jack, S., et al. (2014) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd000011.pub4 · Cited by 2,945
Consumer design priorities for upper limb prosthetics
Biddiss, E., Beaton, D., & Chau, T. (2007) · Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology · doi:10.1080/17483100701714733 · Cited by 519
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
James, O. (2007) · Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory · doi:10.1093/jopart/mum034 · Cited by 435
Voutilainen, A., Pitkäaho, T., Kvist, T., & Vehviläinen‐Julkunen, K. (2016) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/jan.12875 · Cited by 382
Metadata
- Authors
- Crow, R., Gage, H., Hampson, S., Hart, J., Kimber, A., Storey, L., & Thomas, H.
- Venue
- Health Technology Assessment
- Published
- 2002
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 32
- Pages
- 1-244
- ISSN
- 1366-5278 (ISSN-L)
- 2046-4924
- OpenAlex
- W2145806829
- Cited by
- 1,270
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 2.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
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: The measurement of satisfaction with healthcare: implications for practice from a systematic review of the literature. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3310/hta6320
- The paper
- Crow, R., Gage, H., Hampson, S., Hart, J., Kimber, A., Storey, L., & Thomas, H. (2002). The measurement of satisfaction with healthcare: implications for practice from a systematic review of the literature. Health Technology Assessment. https://doi.org/10.3310/hta6320
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.