MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098659908 · doi:10.1080/07359683.2013.844015

Determinants of Patient Satisfaction With Public Hospital Services

2013· article· en· W2098659908 on OpenAlexaffabout
Riadh Ladhari, Benny Rigaux-Bricmont

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Marketing Quarterly · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural equation modelingService qualityPatient satisfactionPsychologyQuality (philosophy)Consumer satisfactionConceptual modelService (business)Empirical researchPublic hospitalTest (biology)Social psychologyMedicineMarketingNursingBusinessComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this research is to propose and test a model of the causal relationships among the constructs of perceived service quality, consumption emotions, and satisfaction among users of public hospital services. The conceptual model proposed in this study postulates that: (a) perceived service quality is positively related to positive emotions and negatively related to negative emotions; (b) perceived service quality is positively related to patient satisfaction; and (c) positive emotions are positively related to patient satisfaction and negative emotions are negatively related to patient satisfaction. The model was tested with data from an empirical study in the Canadian public hospital setting. Data were collected from 314 respondents. The relationships between the constructs were tested using structural equation modeling by means of the EQS software. All hypothesized relationships were supported. The results confirm that perceived service quality exerts both direct and indirect effects (through positive and negative emotions) on satisfaction. The study demonstrates that emotions play an important role in determining satisfaction with hospital services.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Marketing QuarterlySame topicCustomer Service Quality and LoyaltyFrench-language works237,207