Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27017829›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of medical humanities2018

"Getting the Knowledge Right": Patient Communication, Agency, and Knowledge.

Catherine Gouge

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of medical humanities, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Catherine GougeEnglish Department, West Virginia University, PO Box 6296, Morgantown, WV, 26506-6296, USA. cgouge@wvu.edu.
West Virginia University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In 2013, in accordance with a provision in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (2010), the U.S. government began fining hospitals with "excessive" patient readmission rates. Those working to respond to this issue have identified discharge communication with patients as a critical component. In response to this exigency and to contribute to the conversation in the medical humanities about the field's purview and orientation, this article analyzes studies of and texts about communication in health and medicine, ultimately arguing that the on-going circulation of compliance rhetoric and assumptions has limited efforts to improve patient communication. The article, furthermore, considers that humanist ideals of agentic action, the patient-centered care movement's emphasis on the patient, and biomedicine's tendency to treat evidence-based knowledge as fixed and given may have combined to support a rationale for using patient adherence to treatment guidelines as metrics in measurement studies designed to identify effective communication strategies. Finally, the article proposes that those working in the medical humanities consider the value of interdisciplinary posthumanist scholarship-specifically, its treatment of agency and knowledge as emergent, distributed, and contingent-and its potential to transform or extend in productive ways the conversation about what constitutes effective communication with patients.

Indexed as

CommunicationComprehensionPhysician-Patient RelationsHumansPatient DischargePatient Readmissionagencyknowledgepatent dischargepatient communicationposthumanism

Identifiers

PMID27017829
OpenAlexW2325874459

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.