202 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27965350)
1. Measuring the patient experience in primary care: Comparing e-mail and waiting room survey delivery in a family health team.
Slater M; Kiran T
Can Fam Physician; 2016 Dec; 62(12):e740-e748. PubMed ID: 27965350
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Differences in Mode Preferences, Response Rates, and Mode Effect Between Automated Email and Phone Survey Systems for Patients of Primary Care Practices: Cross-Sectional Study.
Johnston S; Hogg W; Wong ST; Burge F; Peterson S
J Med Internet Res; 2021 Jan; 23(1):e21240. PubMed ID: 33427675
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Assessing the representativeness of physician and patient respondents to a primary care survey using administrative data.
Li A; Cronin S; Bai YQ; Walker K; Ammi M; Hogg W; Wong ST; Wodchis WP
BMC Fam Pract; 2018 May; 19(1):77. PubMed ID: 29848292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Understanding disparities in primary care patient experience.
Zhong A; Davie S; Wang R; Kiran T
Can Fam Physician; 2021 Jul; 67(7):e178-e187. PubMed ID: 34261726
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. E-mail or snail mail? Randomized controlled trial on which works better for surveys.
Seguin R; Godwin M; MacDonald S; McCall M
Can Fam Physician; 2004 Mar; 50():414-9. PubMed ID: 15318679
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Assessing Patient Satisfaction and Experience With an Electronic Referral Process.
Mohammed HT; Huebner LA
Qual Manag Health Care; 2020; 29(1):20-29. PubMed ID: 31855932
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Academic family health teams: Part 2: patient perceptions of access.
Carroll JC; Talbot Y; Permaul J; Tobin A; Moineddin R; Blaine S; Bloom J; Butt D; Kay K; Telner D
Can Fam Physician; 2016 Jan; 62(1):e31-9. PubMed ID: 27331229
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The effect of administration mode on CAHPS survey response rates and results: A comparison of mail and web-based approaches.
Fowler FJ; Cosenza C; Cripps LA; Edgman-Levitan S; Cleary PD
Health Serv Res; 2019 Jun; 54(3):714-721. PubMed ID: 30656646
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Mixing web and mail methods in a survey of physicians.
Beebe TJ; Locke GR; Barnes SA; Davern ME; Anderson KJ
Health Serv Res; 2007 Jun; 42(3 Pt 1):1219-34. PubMed ID: 17489911
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. E-Mail Communication Practices and Preferences Among Patients and Providers in a Large Comprehensive Cancer Center.
Cook N; Maganti M; Dobriyal A; Sheinis M; Wei AC; Ringash J; Krzyzanowska MK
J Oncol Pract; 2016 Jul; 12(7):676-84. PubMed ID: 27352950
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Academic family health teams: Part 1: patient perceptions of core primary care domains.
Carroll JC; Talbot Y; Permaul J; Tobin A; Moineddin R; Blaine S; Bloom J; Butt D; Kay K; Telner D
Can Fam Physician; 2016 Jan; 62(1):e23-30. PubMed ID: 27331228
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Disparities in Secure Messaging Uptake Between Patients and Physicians: Longitudinal Analysis of Two National Cross-Sectional Surveys.
Heisey-Grove DM; Carretta HJ
J Med Internet Res; 2020 May; 22(5):e12611. PubMed ID: 32356775
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. An international cross-sectional survey on the Quality and Costs of Primary Care (QUALICO-PC): recruitment and data collection of places delivering primary care across Canada.
Wong ST; Chau LW; Hogg W; Teare GF; Miedema B; Breton M; Aubrey-Bassler K; Katz A; Burge F; Boivin A; Cooke T; Francoeur D; Wodchis WP
BMC Fam Pract; 2015 Feb; 16():20. PubMed ID: 25879427
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Electronic communication between family physicians and patients: Findings from a multisite survey of academic family physicians in Ontario.
Girdhari R; Krueger P; Wang R; Meaney C; Domb S; Larsen D; Kiran T
Can Fam Physician; 2021 Jan; 67(1):39-46. PubMed ID: 33483396
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Large-Scale Survey Findings Inform Patients' Experiences in Using Secure Messaging to Engage in Patient-Provider Communication and Self-Care Management: A Quantitative Assessment.
Haun JN; Patel NR; Lind JD; Antinori N
J Med Internet Res; 2015 Dec; 17(12):e282. PubMed ID: 26690761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A comparison of a postal survey and mixed-mode survey using a questionnaire on patients' experiences with breast care.
Zuidgeest M; Hendriks M; Koopman L; Spreeuwenberg P; Rademakers J
J Med Internet Res; 2011 Sep; 13(3):e68. PubMed ID: 21946048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Using self-reported data on the social determinants of health in primary care to identify cancer screening disparities: opportunities and challenges.
Lofters AK; Schuler A; Slater M; Baxter NN; Persaud N; Pinto AD; Kucharski E; Davie S; Nisenbaum R; Kiran T
BMC Fam Pract; 2017 Feb; 18(1):31. PubMed ID: 28241787
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Patient satisfaction in otolaryngology: Can academic institutions compete?
Boss EF; Thompson RE
Laryngoscope; 2012 May; 122(5):1000-9. PubMed ID: 22461170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Vaccine storage and handling. Knowledge and practice in primary care physicians' offices.
Yuan L; Daniels S; Naus M; Brcic B
Can Fam Physician; 1995 Jul; 41():1169-76. PubMed ID: 7647622
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Do on-site patient satisfaction surveys bias results?
Burroughs TE; Waterman BM; Gilin D; Adams D; McCollegan J; Cira J
Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf; 2005 Mar; 31(3):158-66. PubMed ID: 15828599
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
