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