ArticleCroatian medical journal2010
Priority setting in general practice: health priorities of older patients differ from treatment priorities of their physicians.
Article in Croatian medical journal, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- A Comparative Effectiveness Trial of Two Patient-Centered Interventions for Women with Unmet Social Needs: Personalized Support for Progress and Enhanced Screening and Referral.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2020Trial
- Patient priorities and the doorknob phenomenon in primary care: Can technology improve disclosure of patient stressors?Patient education and counseling · 2018Trial
- Improving Collaborative Management of Multiple Mental and Physical Health Conditions: A Qualitative Inquiry into Designing Technology-Enabled Services for Eliciting Patients' Values.Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction · 2024Article
- Talking about diseases; developing a model of patient and public-prioritised disease phenotypes.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
- Medical care priorities of community-dwelling older adults according to three dimensions of quality of life: Quality of daily living, satisfaction and happiness from birth to death, and human vitality.Geriatrics & gerontology international · 2024Article
- Using a priority setting exercise to identify priorities for guidelines on newborn and child health in South Africa, Malawi, and Nigeria.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- "My Life Isn't Defined by Substance Use": Recovery Perspectives Among Young Adults with Substance Use Disorder.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Article
- Goal-oriented care for patients with chronic conditions or multimorbidity in primary care: A scoping review and concept analysis.PloS one · 2022Article
- Research priority setting in obesity: a systematic review.Zeitschrift fur Gesundheitswissenschaften = Journal of public health · 2021Review
- Supporting collaborative reflection on personal values and health.Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction · 2021Article
- Goal-Based Shared Decision-Making: Developing an Integrated Model.Journal of patient experience · 2020Article
- How Do Treatment Priorities Differ Between Patients in HIV Care and Their Providers? A Mixed-Methods Study.AIDS and behavior · 2020Article
- Methods to Assess Patient Preferences in Old Age Pharmacotherapy - A Systematic Review.Patient preference and adherence · 2020Review
- Article
- Goal setting is insufficiently recognised as an essential part of shared decision-making in the complex care of older patients: a framework analysis.BMC family practice · 2019Article
- Supporting Communication About Values Between People with Multiple Chronic Conditions and their Providers.Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. CHI Conference · 2019Article
- Facilitating Self-reflection about Values and Self-care among Individuals with Chronic Conditions.Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. CHI Conference · 2019Article
- Multimorbidity: can general practitioners identify the health conditions most important to their patients? Results from a national cross-sectional study in Switzerland.BMC family practice · 2018Article
- A three-goal model for patients with multimorbidity: A qualitative approach.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo ascertain health priorities of older patients and treatment priorities of their general practitioners (GP) on the basis of a geriatric assessment and to determine the agreement between these priorities.
methodsThe study included a sample of 9 general practitioners in Hannover, Germany, and a stratified sample of 35 patients (2-5 patients per practice, 18 female, average age 77.7 years). Patients were given a geriatric assessment using the Standardized Assessment for Elderly Patients in Primary Care (STEP) to gain an overview of their health and everyday problems. On the basis of these results, patients and their physicians independently rated the importance of each problem disclosed by the assessment. Whereas patients assessed the importance for their everyday lives, physicians assessed the importance for patients' medical care and patients' everyday lives.
resultsEach patient had a mean ± standard deviation of 18 ± 9.2 health problems. Thirty five patients disclosed a total of 634 problems; 537 (85%) were rated by patients and physicians. Of these 537 problems, 332 (62%) were rated by patients and 334 (62%) by physicians as important for patients' everyday lives. In addition, 294 (55%) were rated by physicians as important for patients' medical care. Although these proportions of important problems were similar between patients and physicians, there was little overlap in the specific problems that each group considered important. The chance-corrected agreement (Cohen κ) between patients and physicians on the importance of problems for patients' lives was low (κ=0.23). Likewise, patients and physicians disagreed on the problems that physicians considered important for patients' medical care (κ=0.18, P<0.001 for each).
conclusionThe low agreement on health and treatment priorities between patients and physicians necessitates better communication between the two parties to strengthen mutual understanding.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.