Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27297350›Full record

ArticleCirculation2016

A Tale of Two Patients: Patient-Centered Approaches to Adherence as a Gateway to Reducing Disparities.

Nancy R Kressin, Sheila E Chapman, Jared W Magnani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Circulation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. The American Society of Nuclear Cardiology Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion mission statement.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2023
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. FACETS: using open data to measure community social determinants of health.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018
    Article
  10. Observational
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

3 authors.

Nancy R KressinFrom VA Boston Healthcare System, Jamaica Plain, MA (N.R.K.); Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine and Boston Medical Center, MA (N.R.K., S.E.C.); and Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, UPMC Heart & Vascular Institute, University of Pittsburgh, PA (J.W.M.). Nkressin@bu.edu.
Sheila E ChapmanFrom VA Boston Healthcare System, Jamaica Plain, MA (N.R.K.); Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine and Boston Medical Center, MA (N.R.K., S.E.C.); and Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, UPMC Heart & Vascular Institute, University of Pittsburgh, PA (J.W.M.).
Jared W MagnaniFrom VA Boston Healthcare System, Jamaica Plain, MA (N.R.K.); Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine and Boston Medical Center, MA (N.R.K., S.E.C.); and Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, UPMC Heart & Vascular Institute, University of Pittsburgh, PA (J.W.M.).

Funding

Center for Health Insurance Reform, Cardiovascular Outcomes, and DisparitiesU01HL105342 · NHLBI · BOSTON MEDICAL CENTER · PI KRESSIN, NANCY R. · 2010 to 2014
$5.6M
Doris Duke Charitable Foundation 2015084NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL105342
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The disparate effects of social determinants of health on cardiovascular health status and health care have been extensively documented by epidemiology. Yet, very little attention has been paid to how understanding and addressing social determinants of health might improve the quality of clinical interactions, especially by improving patients' adherence to recommended therapies. We present a case and suggested approach to illustrate how cardiovascular clinicians can use patient-centered approaches to identify and address social determinants of health barriers to adherence and reduce the impact of unconscious clinician biases. We propose that cardiovascular clinicians (1) recognize that patients may have different belief systems about illnesses' cause and treatment, which may influence their actions, and not assume they share one's experiences or explanatory model; (2) Endeavor to understand the individual patient before you; (3) based on that understanding, tailor your approach to that individual. We suggest a previously-developed mnemonic for an approach to RESPECT the patient: First, show Respect; then elicit patients' understandings of their illness by asking about their Explanatory model. Ask about the patient's Social context, share Power in the interaction, show Empathy, ask about Concerns or fears, and work to develop Trust by building the relationship over time. We provide additional clinical resources to support these efforts, including lay descriptions of cardiovascular conditions, challenges to adherence, and suggested strategies to address them.

Indexed as

Healthcare DisparitiesHealth Status DisparitiesPatient ComplianceHumansPatient-Centered CareSocial Classadherencedisparities, healthcareethnicitypatient-centered caresocial determinants of healthsocioeconomic statustreatment

Identifiers

PMID27297350
PMCPMC4928590

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.