The Health Tourists' Satisfaction Level of Services Provided: A Cross-Sectional Study in Iran
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Patient satisfaction with provided services is used as an indicator of health care quality. Patient satisfaction is defined as patient perception of provided care compared to expected care. This study was administered to evaluate the health tourists' satisfaction of provided services in Lorestan University of Medical Sciences affiliated hospitals in 2015. METHOD: In this descriptive case study, 1800 (696 (54.4 %) men and 812 (45.6 % ) women, 74.5 province native) patients were selected by random sampling from among the patients of Lorestan University of Medical Sciences affiliated hospitals in 2015 spring. The data collection instrument is a semi-structured questionnaire in this study. The questionnaire has 62 general and specific items. Each of the specific items is scaled on four points; satisfied, fairly satisfied, dissatisfied and O.K.. In order to analyze the data both descriptive and inferential statistics were used. RESULTS: Poldokhtar Imam Khomeini Hospital had the highest Level of satisfaction of 68 percent in all aspects (hoteling, discharge, paramedical, nurses, medical and admission) among the studied hospitals. Kuhdasht Imam Khomeini hospital had the lowest level of satisfaction of 53 percent. The overall satisfaction level in all hospitals was 61%. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION: Despite the shortcomings observed in different areas, the results of the present study are in an intermediate status compared to other studies. While treating patients, patient-centered issue and patients 'need and preferences should be focused on to enhance health care quality. Considering Patients preferences not only are morally good but also lead to improved care and access to sustainable care practices. Therefore it is needed to drive organizational management approach toward the customer preferences management and needs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".