Patients’ Satisfaction after Primary Health Care Centers’ Integration with Ministry of Health Hospitals, Jeddah
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A C TIn today's competitive and media-influenced health care environment, resource utilization is driven by patient outcome.A key criterion to evaluate the quality of health care services is to assess patients' satisfaction.The objectives of this study were to compare patients' satisfaction in the first and last quarters after Primary Health Care Centers' (PHCCs) integration with Ministry of Health (MOH) hospitals in Jeddah, and to identify the factors contributing toward patient's satisfaction in first and last quarters.This cross-sectional study was conducted among patients visiting PHCCs in the first and last quarters.Randomly selected participants were interviewed using a validated closed-ended questionnaire, part of which also included modified Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (PSQ18) with its subscales and standard cutoffs.Chi-squared test and multinomial logistic regression analysis were run to find the factors associated with satisfaction.The overall satisfaction in our study participants was 66.3% in the first quarter as compared with 83% in the last quarter.The mean scores of most PSQ18 subscales in the first and last quarters after the integration showed significant difference.Multinomial logistic regression analysis of the first quarter after integration showed three to fourfold increase in satisfaction of individuals who perceive an improvement in registration counters' load, cleanliness of centers, satisfaction with the staff 's behavior, and ease in referral as compared with non-satisfaction [OR 3.60 (p = 0.018); OR 4.33 (p = 0.001); OR 2.47 (p = 0.055); and OR 4.45 (p = 0.005), respectively].However, in the last quarter those satisfied with the staff 's behavior (OR 2.48, p = 0.038), and dental facilities (OR 2.74, p = 0.043) had an odds ratio of ≥2.PHCCs integration with the hospitals is an effective strategy, which not only has improved functionality but has a significant effect on patient's satisfaction.Treating patients served by PHCCs integrated with hospitals is thus recommended.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".