SynthesisPloS one2014
The influence of the patient-clinician relationship on healthcare outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT04361968 (Combining Animal-assisted Intervention and Placebo-induced Analgesia), which is not on this map. Cited by 335 papers, 15 of them syntheses 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.
Combining Animal-assisted Intervention and Placebo-induced Analgesia: The Dog as Treatment in a Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
335 citing papers in PubMed, 15 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Teaching cognitive and affective empathy in medicine: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Medical education online · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review identifying effective teaching methods and their combinations for increasing empathy in physicians: pairwise and network meta-analysis.BMC medical education · 2025Pooled it
- Improving Acceptability of mHealth Apps-The Use of the Technology Acceptance Model to Assess the Acceptability of mHealth Apps: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- A model of contributors to a trusting patient-physician relationship: a critical review using a systematic search strategy.BMC primary care · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Patient and Provider Emergency Care Experiences Related to Intimate Partner Violence: A Systematic Review of the Existing Evidence.Trauma, violence & abuse · 2023Pooled it
- Understanding the role of positive emotions in healthcare communication - A realist review.Nursing open · 2023Pooled it
- Impacts of visual impairment on pragmatic impairment: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2023Pooled it
- Mixed methods systematic review of the literature base exploring working alliance in the chiropractic profession.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2022Pooled it
- Effectiveness of remote home monitoring for patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): systematic review.BMC health services research · 2022Pooled it
- Predictors of Physician Compassion, Empathy, and Related Constructs: a Systematic Review.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Pooled it
- A systematic review of interventions to support adults with ADHD at work-Implications from the paucity of context-specific research for theory and practice.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Pooled it
- Multidisciplinary team intervention to reduce the nocebo effect when switching from the originator infliximab to a biosimilar.RMD open · 2021Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Barriers and facilitators to GP-patient communication about emotional concerns in UK primary care: a systematic review.Family practice · 2020Pooled it
- A Randomised Controlled Trial Testing the Efficacy of an Educational Website About Functional Abdominal Pain for Children and Adolescents.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2026Trial
- The impact of a patient advisory board on a clinical comparative effectiveness trial: a comparison of patient and researcher perspectives.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2025Trial
- Women's preferences regarding the use of chaperones during proctological examinations conducted by male physicians: a randomised clinical trial.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Trial
- Effects and safety of a CBD-richFrontiers in pharmacology · 2025Trial
- "I Felt Like I Mattered": Caring is a key ingredient of collaborative care for chronic illness.Chronic illness · 2024Trial
275 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether the patient-clinician relationship has a beneficial effect on either objective or validated subjective healthcare outcomes.
designSystematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases EMBASE and MEDLINE and the reference sections of previous reviews. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Included studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adult patients in which the patient-clinician relationship was systematically manipulated and healthcare outcomes were either objective (e.g., blood pressure) or validated subjective measures (e.g., pain scores). Studies were excluded if the encounter was a routine physical, or a mental health or substance abuse visit; if the outcome was an intermediate outcome such as patient satisfaction or adherence to treatment; if the patient-clinician relationship was manipulated solely by intervening with patients; or if the duration of the clinical encounter was unequal across conditions.
resultsThirteen RCTs met eligibility criteria. Observed effect sizes for the individual studies ranged from d = -.23 to .66. Using a random-effects model, the estimate of the overall effect size was small (d = .11), but statistically significant (p = .02).
conclusionsThis systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs suggests that the patient-clinician relationship has a small, but statistically significant effect on healthcare outcomes. Given that relatively few RCTs met our eligibility criteria, and that the majority of these trials were not specifically designed to test the effect of the patient-clinician relationship on healthcare outcomes, we conclude with a call for more research on this important topic.
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.