ArticleBMJ open2016
'Please don't call me Mister': patient preferences of how they are addressed and their knowledge of their treating medical team in an Australian hospital.
Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Admitted patients' recall of their treating doctors' names in adult wards of a South African district hospital.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2026Article
- Patient's expectations and perceptions on quality of care; An evaluation using SERVQUAL gap in Kenya.PloS one · 2025Article
- Human Connection: Oncologist Characteristics and Behaviors Associated With Therapeutic Bonding With Latino Patients With Advanced Cancer.JCO oncology practice · 2024Article
- Exploring Critical Components of Physician-Patient Communication: A Qualitative Study of Lay and Professional Perspectives.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- A Doctor's Name as a Brand: A Nationwide Survey on Registered Clinic Names in Taiwan.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate how patients prefer to be addressed by healthcare providers and to assess their knowledge of their attending medical team's identity in an Australian Hospital.
settingSingle-centre, large tertiary hospital in Australia.
participants300 inpatients were included in the survey. Patients were selected in a sequential, systematic and whole-ward manner. Participants were excluded with significant cognitive impairment, non-English speaking, under the age of 18 years or were too acutely unwell to participate. The sample demographic was predominately an older population of Anglo-Saxon background. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients preferred mode of address from healthcare providers including first name, title and second name, abbreviated first name or another name. Whether patients disliked formal address of title and second name. Secondarily, patient knowledge of their attending medical team members name and role and if correct, what position within the medical hierarchy they held.
resultsOver 99% of patients prefer informal address with greater than one-third having a preference to being called a name other than their legal first name. 57% of patients were unable to correctly name a single member of their attending medical team.
conclusionsThese findings support patient preference of informal address; however, healthcare providers cannot assume that a documented legal first name is preferred by the patient. Patient knowledge of their attending medical team is poor and suggests current introduction practices are insufficient.
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.