Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26597382›Full record

ArticlePatient education and counseling2016

"Like a dialogue": Teach-back in the emergency department.

Margaret Samuels-Kalow, Emily Hardy, Karin Rhodes, Cynthia Mollen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient education and counseling, 2016. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Scoping Review of Adult Emergency Department Discharge Interventions.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2025
    Article
  9. Identifying Facilitators and Inhibitors of Shared Understanding: An Ethnography of Diagnosis Communication in Acute Medical Settings.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. A Scoping Review of Current Social Emergency Medicine Research.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2021
    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.

Margaret Samuels-KalowDivision of Emergency Medicine, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Department of Pediatrics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, United States. Electronic address: samuelskalowm@email.chop.edu.
Emily HardyDivision of Emergency Medicine, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Karin RhodesHospital of the University of Pennsylvania and Department of Emergency Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, United States.
Cynthia MollenDivision of Emergency Medicine, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Department of Pediatrics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, United States.

Funding

Enabling Medical Research Growth in Emergency MedicineK12HL109009 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI KIMMEL, STEPHEN E. · 2011 to 2015
$3.4M
NHLBI NIH HHS K12 HL109009NHLBI NIH HHS K12HL10900904
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTeach-back may improve communication, but has not been well studied in the emergency setting. The goal of this study was to characterize perceptions of teach-back in the emergency department (ED) by health literacy.

methodsWe conducted an in-depth interview study on the ED discharge process examining teach-back techniques in two tertiary care centers (adult and pediatric), using asthma as a model system for health communication. Participants were screened for health literacy, and purposive sampling was used to balance the sample between literacy groups. Interviews were conducted until thematic saturation was reached for each literacy group at each site; audiotaped, transcribed, coded, and analyzed using a modified grounded theory approach.

resultsFifty-one interviews were completed (31 parents; 20 patients). Across all groups, participants felt that teach-back would help them confirm learning, avoid forgetting key information, and improve doctor-patient communication. Participants with limited health literacy raised concerns about teach-back being condescending, but suggested techniques for introducing the technique to avoid this perception.

conclusionMost participants were supportive of teach-back techniques, but many were concerned about perceived judgment from providers. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Future investigations should focus on feasibility and efficacy of teach-back in the ED and using participant generated wording to introduce teach-back.

Indexed as

AsthmaEmergency Service, HospitalTeach-Back CommunicationAdultChildFemaleHealth LiteracyHumansInterviews as TopicMalePatient Education as TopicPediatricsPhysician-Patient RelationsQualitative ResearchEmergency medicineHealth literacyTeach-back

Identifiers

PMID26597382
PMCPMC4808368

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.