Observational studyJournal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM
Accuracy and congruence of patient and physician weight-related discussions: from project CHAT (Communicating Health: Analyzing Talk).
Observational study in Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accuracy and congruence of physician and adolescent patient weight-related discussions: Teen CHAT (Communicating health: Analyzing talk).Patient education and counseling · 2018Trial
- Provider Counseling and Weight Loss Outcomes in a Primary Care-Based Digital Obesity Treatment.Journal of general internal medicine · 2019Article
- Variation in patient-provider communication by patient's race and ethnicity, provider type, and continuity in and site of care: An analysis of data from the Connecticut Health Care Survey.SAGE open medicine · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivePrimary care providers should counsel overweight patients to lose weight. Rates of self-reported, weight-related counseling vary, perhaps because of self-report bias. We assessed the accuracy and congruence of weight-related discussions among patients and physicians during audio-recorded encounters.
methodsWe audio-recorded encounters between physicians (n = 40) and their overweight/obese patients (n = 461) at 5 community-based practices. We coded weight-related content and surveyed patients and physicians immediately after the visit. Generalized linear mixed models assessed factors associated with accuracy.
resultsOverall, accuracy was moderate: patient (67%), physician (70%), and congruence (62%). When encounters containing weight-related content were analyzed, patients (98%) and physicians (97%) were highly accurate and congruent (95%), but when weight was not discussed, patients and physicians were more inaccurate and incongruent (patients, 36%; physicians, 44%; 28% congruence). Physicians who were less comfortable discussing weight were more likely to misreport that weight was discussed (odds ratio, 4.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.88-10.75). White physicians with African American patients were more likely to report accurately no discussion about weight than white physicians with white patients (odds ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.69).
conclusionPhysician and patient self-report of weight-related discussions were highly accurate and congruent when audio-recordings indicated weight was discussed but not when recordings indicated no weight discussions. Physicians' overestimation of weight discussions when weight is not discussed constitutes missed opportunities for health interventions.
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.