Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22990681›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2013

Unannounced standardized patient assessment of the roter interaction analysis system: the challenge of measuring patient-centered communication.

Saul J Weiner, Alan Schwartz, Kali Cyrus, Amy Binns-Calvey, Frances M Weaver, Gunjan Sharma, Rachel Yudkowsky

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Saul J WeinerUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, 105 CMW MC 784, 1853 W. Polk St., Chicago, IL 60612, USA. sweiner@uic.edu
Alan Schwartz
Kali Cyrus
Amy Binns-Calvey
Frances M Weaver
Gunjan Sharma
Rachel Yudkowsky

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite wide-spread endorsement of patient-centered communication (PCC) in health care, there has been little evidence that it leads to positive change in health outcomes. The lack of correlation may be due either to an overestimation of the value of PCC or to a measurement problem. If PCC measures do not capture elements of the interaction that determine whether the resulting care plan is patient-centered, they will confound efforts to link PCC to outcomes.

objectiveTo evaluate whether one widely used measure of PCC, the Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS), captures patient-centered care planning.

designRIAS was employed in the coding of unannounced standardized patient (USP) encounters that were scripted so that the failure to address patient contextual factors would result in an ineffective plan of care. The design enabled an assessment of whether RIAS can differentiate between communication behavior that does and does not result in a care plan that takes into account a patient's circumstances and needs.

participantsEight actors role playing four scripted cases (one African American and one Caucasian for each case) in 399 visits to 111 internal medicine attending physicians. MAIN MEASURES: RIAS measures included composites for physician utterance types and (in separate models) two different previously applied RIAS patient-centeredness summary composites. The gold standard comparison measure was whether the physician's treatment plan, as abstracted from the visit note, successfully addressed the patient's problem. Mixed effects regression models were used to evaluate the relationship between RIAS measures and USP measured performance, controlling for a variety of design features. KEY

resultsNone of the RIAS measures of PCC differentiated encounters in which care planning was patient-centered from care planning in which it was not.

conclusionsRIAS, which codes each utterance during a visit into mutually exclusive and exhaustive categories, does not differentiate between conversations leading to and not leading to care plans that accommodate patients' circumstances and needs.

Indexed as

CommunicationPhysician-Patient RelationsAdultAgedClinical CompetenceDecision MakingFemaleHumansIllinoisMaleMedical ErrorsMiddle AgedOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CarePatient Care PlanningPatient-Centered CarePatient Simulation

Identifiers

PMID22990681
PMCPMC3614126

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.