Author's response to reviews Title:Which family physician should I choose? The analytic hierarchy process approach in the selection of a family physician Authors (original) (raw)
Related papers
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
Choosing the most appropriate family physician (FP) for the individual, plays a fundamental role in primary care. The aim of this study is to determine the selection criteria for the patients in choosing their family doctors and priority ranking of these criteria by using the multi-criteria decision-making method of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) model. The study was planned and conducted in two phases. In the first phase, factors affecting the patients' decisions were revealed with a qualitative research. In the next phase, the priorities of FP selection criteria were determined by using AHP model. Criteria were compared in pairs. 96 patient were asked to fill the information forms which contains comparison scores in the Family Health Centres. According to the analysis of focus group discussions FP selection criteria were congregated in to five groups: Individual Characteristics, Patient-Doctor relationship, Professional characteristics, the Setting, and Ethical Character...
Peer Reviewers for the Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine in 2012
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 2013
We thank our peer reviewers for their time, expertise, and dedication to the Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine (JABFM). The JABFM peer reviewers serve a vital role in contributing to the field of family medicine and the scientific community. We would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge and thank our peer reviewers for their support during the last year. In 2012, 372 individuals provided 476 peer reviews and advice regarding the suitability of articles for publication in the JABFM. Reviewers took an average of 22 days to submit a review. Top Reviewers We would like to recognize our top reviewers. Each of the manuscripts submitted to the JABFM that undergo peer review is evaluated and scored by the editors; in the list below, peer reviewers with an asterisk next to their name are in the top 12% (based on evaluation scores plus quantity of reviews) of all reviewers in 2012.
Peer Reviewers for the Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine in 2007
Journal of The American Board of Family Medicine, 2008
We thank the following reviewers for their time, expertise, and dedication to the JABFM. The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine (JABFM) peer reviewers serve a vital role in contributing to the field of family medicine and the scientific community. We would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge and thank our peer reviewers for their support during the last year. In 2010, 348 individuals provided 421 peer reviews and advice regarding the suitability of articles for publication in the JABFM. Reviewers took an average of 23 days to submit a review.
Peer Reviewers for the Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine in 2009
Journal of The American Board of Family Medicine, 2010
We thank the following reviewers for their time, expertise, and dedication to the JABFM. The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine (JABFM) peer reviewers serve a vital role in contributing to the field of family medicine and the scientific community. We would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge and thank our peer reviewers for their support during the last year. In 2010, 348 individuals provided 421 peer reviews and advice regarding the suitability of articles for publication in the JABFM. Reviewers took an average of 23 days to submit a review.