PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of multidimensional service quality on word of mouth (WOM) in university on-campus healthcare centers.Design/methodology/approachData were collected from self-administered questionnaires involving a sample of 407 currently enrolled student-patients visiting the on-campus university healthcare centers in the Jordanian capital, Amman. Non-probability convenience sampling was performed in this study. Factor analysis and multiple and hierarchical multiple regression methods were used to analyze the data and test the proposed relationships.FindingsThe results show that the primary dimensions (administration quality, interpersonal quality and technical quality) had a significant and positive impact on WOM, with administration quality appearing as the most influential factor leading to WOM. At the subdimensions level, the findings of this study revealed that interaction activity had the most significant predictive value on WOM compared to the other service quality subdimensions. An insignificant relationship between atmosphere, tangibles, relationship activity and WOM was found.Practical implicationsThis study suggests that university administrators and managers of other high-contact service sectors (e.g. hospitality and travel services, tourism education services, financial and insurance services and public services) ought to take into consideration both service quality subdimensions and satisfaction as significant strategic endpoints, as these inputs provide a roadmap for administrators to elicit positive WOM from customers with regard to their businesses.Originality/valueThis study provided its contribution by presenting a comprehensive model of WOM formation and offering specific insights for the on-campus healthcare centers in higher education institutions. This is also the first study conducted in the Middle East, particularly in Jordan.

We report the case of a 56-year-old male with pancreatic cancer and 25 liver metastases. The patient underwent a distal pancreatectomy with 11 metastasectomies in the left liver lobe. Histological examination demonstrated a moderately differentiated ductal adenocarcinoma with pT3N0M1, Stage IVb. Three weeks later, we performed transarterial chemoembolization for the right lobe of the liver, and after 6 weeks we started systemic chemotherapy with FOLFIRINOX. After 31 months, computer tomography examination showed increases in size of the remaining lesions at segment VII/VIII of the right lobe. All liver metastases were surgically removed and a new chemotherapy was initiated. Nevertheless, after 40 months the patient developed two brain metastases. One was surgically resected and the smaller lesion was treated by gamma knife. Unfortunately, the patient died 42 months after the first presentation. Conclusively, in very selected patients with synchronic liver metastasis, multimodal treatment including repeated surgery, TACE and chemotherapy may prolong survival.