Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24795073›Full record

SynthesisPatient education and counseling2014

Does improving patient-practitioner communication improve clinical outcomes in patients with cardiovascular diseases? A systematic review of the evidence.

Antoinette Schoenthaler, Adina Kalet, Joseph Nicholson, Mack Lipkin

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Patient education and counseling, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Current Situations and Challenges in the Development of Health Information Literacy.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

4 authors.

Antoinette SchoenthalerCenter for Healthful Behavior Change, Department of Population Health, New York University School of Medicine, New York, USA. Electronic address: antoinette.schoenthaler@nyumc.org.
Adina KaletSection of Primary Care, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA.
Joseph NicholsonNYU Health Sciences Libraries, Department of Medical Library, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA.
Mack LipkinSection of Primary Care, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, NYU School of Medicine, New York, USA.

Funding

Racial Differences in Patient-Provider Communication and Medication Adherence.K23HL098564 · NHLBI · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI SCHOENTHALER, ANTOINETTE M · 2010 to 2014
$661k
NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL098564NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL 098564-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo conduct a systematic literature review appraising the effects of interventions to improve patient-practitioner communication on cardiovascular-related clinical outcomes.

methodsDatabases were searched up to March 27, 2013 to identify eligible studies that included interventions to improve patient and/or practitioner communication skills and assessment of a cardiovascular-related clinical outcome in adults ≥18 years of age.

resultsFifteen papers were reviewed: the primary focus in seven studies was the patient; seven included a practitioner-focused intervention and one targeted both. Two patient-focused and two practitioner-focused studies demonstrated a beneficial effect of the intervention compared to a control group. Patient-focused studies were designed to improve patients' information-seeking and question-asking skills with their practitioner. Practitioner-focused studies were designed to either improve practitioner's general patient-centered communication or risk communication skills.

conclusionFew interventions targeting patient-practitioner communication have assessed the impact on cardiovascular-related clinical outcomes, limiting the ability to determine effectiveness. Additional rigorous research supported by theoretical frameworks and validated measurement is needed to understand the potential of patient-practitioner communication to improve cardiovascular-related clinical outcomes. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Investments in communication skills trainings in medical education and practice are needed in order to attain the full potential of patient-centered care on cardiovascular-related clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

CommunicationOutcome Assessment, Health CareProfessional-Patient RelationsAdultAgedCardiovascular DiseasesHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient-Centered CareCardiovascular diseasesPatient–practitioner communicationSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID24795073
PMCPMC4091848

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.