Skip to main content

Table 3 Rotated pattern matrix after principal component analysisa) of 16 variables of the referral process from 57 general practitioners in Norway during spring 2014

From: Erratum to: Typologies in GPs’ referral practice

Components

Variables

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

A3: Afraid of rejection of referral

.872

.052

-.056

.031

-.051

.124

.038

-.040

A4: Not being good enough

.864

-.131

-.114

-.066

-.055

.021

-.176

.020

A2: Unknown expectations

.661

-.050

.246

.015

.060

-.130

.383

-.044

B4: Suggested waiting

-.029

.826

.252

.150

-.264

-.066

-.074

-.071

B3: Priority in referral

-.159

.760

-.152

.028

.370

.157

.056

.030

A1: Using much time to refer

.043

-.148

-.910

.110

.108

.021

-.039

-.123

A7: Referral in consultation

-.013

-.138

.690

.062

.407

.111

-.068

-.187

B5: Conferred with consultant

.026

-.127

.103

-.950

.056

.097

-.078

.147

A8: Patient opinion important

-.068

.002

.085

-.040

.841

-.037

-.108

-.196

A5: Contact with consultant

-.023

.021

-.139

.080

.431

.041

.431

.373

B6: Time used to refer

.043

.027

-.025

-.346

.027

.848

.124

-.095

B1: Difficult referral

.152

.091

.083

.351

.006

.713

-.287

.279

A6: Referral avoided if contact

.308

.373

-.100

-.048

.333

-.426

-.240

.145

A10: Copy gives better quality

-.020

.020

-.009

-.027

.118

-.017

-.873

.038

A9: Referral copy to patient

.033

-.060

.036

.247

.213

-.022

-.007

-.795

B2: Patient pressure

-.004

-.343

.198

.356

.084

.004

-.095

.601

  1. a)Using an oblique (oblimin) rotation with Kaiser normalisation. Loadings larger than 0.4 are highlighted