You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 34, Issue 4
  • Authors’ response: ‘Predictors of patient satisfaction in an emergency care centre in central Saudi Arabia: a prospective study’

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PostScript
Letter
Authors’ response: ‘Predictors of patient satisfaction in an emergency care centre in central Saudi Arabia: a prospective study’
  1. Mostafa A Abolfotouh1,2,
  2. Mohammed H Al-Assiri1,
  3. Rabab T Alshahrani3,
  4. Zainab M Almutairi1,
  5. Raid A Hijazi4,
  6. Ahmed S Alaskar1,2,4
  1. 1King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
  2. 2King Saud Bin-Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
  3. 3King Saud University, College of Medicine, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
  4. 4King Abdulaziz Medical City, Ministry of National Guard—Health Affairs, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
  1. Correspondence to Professor Mostafa A Abolfotouh, King Abdullah International Medical Research Center (Mail Code 1515), King Saud Bin-Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences (KSAU-HS), Ministry of National Guard—Health Affairs, POB 22490, Riyadh 11426, Saudi Arabia; mabolfotouh{at}gmail.com

https://doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2016-206403

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Dear Editor

    I thank Mirhaghi et al1 for their interest in our newly published manuscript ‘Predictors of patient satisfaction in an emergency care centre in central Saudi Arabia: a prospective study’.2 I am happy to reply to their comments on our study.

    Regarding the issue of not including patients with all triage levels, this was simply due to the study design, which is a prospective one, for …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors All authors contributed to the design and execution of the study and analyses. MAA and RAH were actively involved in writing the manuscript. RTA, MHA and ZMA collected the data and shared data analysis and interpretation. ASA and RAH commented on drafts presented to them. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

    • Competing interests None.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles