239 Supplement 1 - (continued) No. Author(s), year, country of study Study objective Study design Study duration Disease group Study setting Patients’ age group (yrs) Number of participants completing PREMs PREM used in the study Person completing the survey Administration method Quality score 62 Fustino, Nicholas J; Wohlfeil, Margo; Smith, Hayden L, 2018, USA62 To determine key drivers of high patient satisfaction and factors which increase the probability of the patient recommending the practice to others. Cross- sectional descriptive survey 2 years 5 months Hematology- oncology disorder Hematologyoncology unit <21 281 Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Clinician & Group Survey (CG-CAHPS) NR Electronic Fair 63 Furness, Caroline L; Smith, Lesley; Morris, Eva; Brocklehurst, Caroline; Daly, Sasha; Hough, Rachael E, 2017, UK63 To identify areas of improvement in teen and young adult cancer care and to see if there has been a stepwise increase in patient satisfaction over time. Research also assessed whether care in a principle treatment centre affects patient experience. Retrospective cohort 4 years Cancer Varied 13-24 1367 The national cancer patient experience survey Patient Paper Good 64 Gray, J E; Safran, C; Davis, R B; PompilioWeitzner, G; Stewart, J E; Zaccagnini, L; Pursley, D, 2000, USA64 To evaluate the efficacy of an Internet-based telemedicine program in the NICU through assessing parental quality assessments of their care. Randomized control trial Nov 1997- April 1999 General (NICU - low birth weight) NICU Neonates 31 The Picker Institute’s Neonatal Intensive Care Unit FamilySatisfaction survey Proxy NR Good 8
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw