The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Investigating the relationship between consultation length and patient experience: a cross-sectional study in primary care
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Longer consultations in primary care have been linked with better quality of care and improved health-related outcomes. However, there is little evidence of any potential association between consultation length and patient experience. AIM: To examine the relationship between consultation length and patient-reported communication, trust and confidence in the doctor, and overall satisfaction. DESIGN AND SETTING: Analysis of 440 videorecorded consultations and associated patient experience questionnaires from 13 primary care practices in England. METHOD: Patients attending a face-to-face consultation with participating GPs consented to having their consultations videoed and completed a questionnaire. Consultation length was calculated from the videorecording. Linear regression (adjusting for patient and doctor demographics) was used to investigate associations between patient experience (overall communication, trust and confidence, and overall satisfaction) and consultation length. RESULTS: There was no evidence that consultation length was associated with any of the three measures of patient experience (P >0.3 for all). Adjusted changes on a 0-100 scale per additional minute of consultation were: communication score 0.02 (95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.20 to 0.25), trust and confidence in the doctor 0.07 (95% CI = -0.27 to 0.41), and satisfaction -0.14 (95% CI = -0.46 to 0.18). CONCLUSION: The authors found no association between patient experience measures of communication and consultation length, and patients may sometimes report good experiences from very short consultations. However, longer consultations may be required to achieve clinical effectiveness and patient safety: aspects also important for achieving high quality of care. Future research should continue to study the benefits of longer consultations, particularly for patients with complex multiple conditions.
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.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Whilst we acknowledge that more communication is not necessarily better communication (25), it may be advantageous for clinicians to adopt active strategies that allow them to build rapport with lower SES patients who are keen to voice their concerns.”
From High levels of socioeconomic deprivation do not inhibit patients’ communication of concerns in head and neck cancer review clinics (2018) · cites this paper as [25]
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
The meaning of patient satisfaction: An explanation of high reported levels
Williams, B., Coyle, J., & Healy, D. (1998) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0277-9536(98)00213-5 · Cited by 610
Hobbs, R. F., Bankhead, C. R., Mukhtar, T. K., Stevens, S., Perera, R., Holt, T., & Salisbury, C. (2016) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(16)00620-6 · Cited by 609
Consultation length in general practice: cross sectional study in six European countries
Deveugele, M., Derese, A., van den Brink-Muinen, A., Bensing, J., & De Maeseneer, J. (2002) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.325.7362.472 · Cited by 515
Bjertnæs, Ø. A., Sjetne, I. S., & Iversen, H. H. (2011) · BMJ Quality & Safety · doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2011-000137 · Cited by 336
Effects of Survey Mode, Patient Mix, and Nonresponse on CAHPS ® Hospital Survey Scores
Elliott, M. N., Zaslavsky, A. M., Goldstein, E. H., Lehrman, W. G., Hambarsoomians, K., Beckett, M. K., & Giordano, L. (2009) · Health Services Research · doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2008.00914.x · Cited by 322
Morrell, D. C., Evans, M. E., Morris, R. W., & Roland, M. O. (1986) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.292.6524.870 · Cited by 211
Self-citationLong to short consultation ratio: a proxy measure of quality of care for general practice.
Howie, J. G., Porter, A. M., Heaney, D., & Hopton, J. (1991) · PubMed Central · Cited by 206
Does awareness of being video recorded affect doctors' consultation behaviour?
(1990) · PubMed Central · Cited by 186
Orth, J. E., Stiles, W. B., Scherwitz, L. W., Hennrikus, D. J., & al, E. (1987) · Health Psychology · doi:10.1037//0278-6133.6.1.29 · Cited by 176
"I want more time with my doctor": a quantitative study of time and the consultation
Ogden, J. (2004) · Family Practice · doi:10.1093/fampra/cmh502 · Cited by 171
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Roland M Campbell J Burt J (2016) Improving patient experience in primary care: a multi-method programme of research on the measurement and improvement of patient experience final report. NIHR Journals Library, in press.
- 10.1186/1471-2296-10-57 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–113 of 113
Guldhammer, C., Holden, S., Sørensen, M. E., Olesen, J. L., Jensen, M. B., & Rathleff, M. S. (2021) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.14920985
Gong, X., Hou, M., Guo, R., & Feng, X. L. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.21192061
Guldhammer, C., Holden, S., Sørensen, M. E., Olesen, J. L., Jensen, M. B., & Rathleff, M. S. (2021) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.14920979
Swanson, K. M., Matulis, J. C., & McCoy, R. G. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.19314705
Swanson, K. M., Matulis, J. C., & McCoy, R. G. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.19314702
Swanson, K. M., Matulis, J. C., & McCoy, R. G. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.19314699
Xianger, Y. U. A. N., Wu, Y., Xu, Z., & Dongqing, Z. H. U. (2026) · Psychology and Health · doi:10.1080/08870446.2026.2673136
Fryd, R., Barrett, B., Lundstrøm, S. L., Frølich, A., & Aamann, I. C. (2026) · Patient Preference and Adherence · doi:10.2147/ppa.s580542
Alhammad, S. A., Almuhanna, O. K., Aldosari, M. S., & Aljumaah, A. R. (2026) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.21394
Taylor, T., Steel, A., Foley, H., Debono, D. S., & Bishop, F. L. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-10186022/v1
Santander, N. (2026) · Scripta Scientia · doi:10.66201/ss.v1.39
Litchfield, I. J., Dutton, F., Harper, L., Kaur, S., Luxmore, C., Rahman, L., Wolhuter, C. C., & Bird, C. (2026) · Frontiers in Pediatrics · doi:10.3389/fped.2026.1896606
Montori, V. M., Larios, F., Bandi, S. S. S., Proano, A. C., Guevara, K., Andrango, L. V., Bagewadi, S., Gastel, A. V., Branda, M. E., CAMP, A. W., et al. (2026) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-026-10849-x
Metadata
- Authors
- Elmore, N., Burt, J., Abel, G., Maratos, F. A., Montague, J., Campbell, J., & Roland, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- University of Exeter (GB)
- University of Derby (GB)
- Venue
- British Journal of General Practice
- Published
- 2016-10-24
- Volume
- 66
- Issue
- 653
- Pages
- e896-e903
- ISSN
- 0960-1643 (ISSN-L)
- 1478-5242
- PMC
- PMC5198642
- OpenAlex
- W2536263250
- Cited by
- 114
- References
- 41
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 14
- FWCI
- 18.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- British Journal of General Practice (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- University of Derby Online Research Archive. (University of Derby) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Apollo (cc-by)
- Funders
- National Institute for Health and Care Research (RP-PG-0608-10050)
- Programme Grants for Applied Research (RP-PG-0608-10050)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Primary Care and Health Outcomes
- Keywords
- consultation time, patient experience, primary care, physician-patient communication, trust in physicians, patient satisfaction, general practitioners, quality of care
- MeSH terms
- Appointments and Schedules, Cross-Sectional Studies, England, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Physician-Patient Relations, Primary Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Referral and Consultation, Time Factors, Patient Satisfaction
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
