Skip to main content
. 2004 Nov;19(11):1088–1095. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30420.x

Table 5.

Predictors of Patient and Physician Satisfaction, Using Multilevel Multiple Regression Analysis

Final model Patient Satisfaction (n = 298) Coeff (SE) Physician Satisfaction (n = 296) Coeff (SE)
Fixed effect
 Intercept 39.51 (4.21) 42.79 (6.41)
 Patient variables
  Age Not selected 0.10 (0.05)
  Education Not selected 1.39 (0.62)*
  Primary language (0.1) Not selected −9.23 (2.60)***
  Physical health Not selected 0.14 (0.07)
  Mental health Not selected 0.18 (0.07)*
  Preference/info (0.1)§ Not selected 4.35 (1.96)*
  Preference/decision  making Not selected 0.50 (0.28)
  Self-efficacy in  communication 0.88 (0.10)*** Not selected
 Visit-specific variables
  Sequential number  of visit Not selected −0.31 (0.24)
  No. of prior visits  (this physician) 0.81 (0.43) Not selected
  Reason visit “increase  of symptoms” (0.1)|| −1.82 (1.88) Not selected
 Physician variables
  Physician's gender (0.1) 4.17 (1.35)** Not selected
  Dept. (0.1; 1 = rheumatology) Not selected −6.23 (3.42)
  Dept. (0.1; 1 = gastroenterology) Not selected −1.59 (2.73)
Random effect
 Visit level (σ2e) 132.31 (10.84) 167.80 (14.53)
 Physician level (σ2µ0) 0.00 (0.00) 25.11 (11.12)
R2 (visit level) .27 .19
 R2 (physician level) .35
 Goodness of fit: χ2 (df)# 93.7 (4)*** 50.7 (10)***

The intercept can be interpreted as the average satisfaction of a (hypothetical) subject scoring 0 for each predictor in the model.

*

P < .05;

0 = Dutch, 1 = other.

***

P < .001.

§

0 = preference for all information possible, 1 = less than all information.

||

0 = no, yes = 1.

0 = male, 1 = female.

**

P < .01;

#

Improvement of fit compared to model 0 (empty model).