Testing a New Theory of Patient Satisfaction With Treatment Outcome
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Theories of patient satisfaction with treatment outcome have not been developed and tested in healthcare settings. The objectives of this study were to test a new theory linking patient satisfaction and embodiment (body--self unity) and examine it in relation to other competing theories. DESIGN: We conducted a prospective cohort study. SETTING: This study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital. PATIENTS: We studied 122 individuals undergoing elective hand surgery. METHODS: Satisfaction with treatment outcome approximately 4 months after surgery was examined against the following factors (representing 7 theories of satisfaction): 1) overall clinical outcome, 2) patients' a priori self-selected important clinical outcomes, 3) foresight expectations, 4) hindsight expectations, 5) psychologic state, 6) psychologic state in those with poor outcomes, and 7) embodiment. ANALYSIS: Seven hypotheses were tested first using univariate analyses and then multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS: Satisfaction with treatment outcome was significantly associated with embodiment. Three confounders--the extent to which surgery successfully addressed patients' most important reason for surgery, hindsight expectations, and workers' compensation--were also significant. The final model explained 84% of the variance in a multidimensional measure of satisfaction with treatment outcome. CONCLUSION: This research suggests that satisfaction with treatment outcome could be facilitated by developing strategies to improve body--self unity, and eliciting and addressing the patient's most important reason for undergoing treatment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it