Observational studyPloS one2018
Factors associated with patient recall of key information in ambulatory specialty care visits: Results of an innovative methodology.
Observational study in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
42 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 109 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of the readability of ChatGPT and Bard in medical communication: a meta-analysis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Impact of GPT-4-Generated Discharge Letters on Patients' Medical Comprehension: Prospective Crossover Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Trial
- Application of the augmented reality tool VSI holomedicine for improved patient education before sinus surgery - a prospective randomised pilot study.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Patient-Clinician Communication Interventions Across Multiple Primary Care Sites: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA health forum · 2024Trial
- Using the teach-back method to improve postpartum maternal-infant health among women with limited maternal health literacy: a randomized controlled study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Trial
- Trial
- Learning Teach-Back in clinical practice: a qualitative study of healthcare professionals.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Patient and caregiver experiences of barriers to longitudinal care in coccidioidal meningitis in California's central valley: a qualitative study.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2026Article
- Factors Associated With Inaccurate Recall of Inherited Cancer Genetic Test Results Among Individuals With Germline Pathogenic Variants.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Shared Decision-Making in Treatment Selection in Multiple Myeloma in Spain: The PRISMMA Study.European journal of haematology · 2026Article
- Transforming the Primary Care Journey with Generative AI: A Foundation Model to Boost Efficiency, Quality, and Engagement.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- A Qualitative Study of Cytomegalovirus Awareness and Experience in Kidney Transplant Recipients.Journal of transplantation · 2026Article
- Consumer Co-Design of an Online Resource to Build Communication Skills of Health Consumers: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Observed and Patient-Perceived Information Provision When Diagnosed With Parkinson's Disease.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2025Observational
- Assessment of barriers to pancreatic cancer surveillance in high-risk individuals.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Article
- The Role of Sociodemographic Characteristics and Social Determinants of Health in Influencing the Perceived Quality of Patient-Provider Communication.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2025Article
- Communicating cancer treatment with pictogram-based timeline visualizations.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Knowledge and Information-Seeking Behaviors of People Living With Multiple Sclerosis: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
While some studies have assessed patient recall of important information from ambulatory care visits, none has done so recently. Furthermore, little is known about features of clinical interactions which are associated with patient understanding and recall, without which shared decision making, a widely shared ideal for patient care, cannot occur. Our objective was to evaluate characteristics of patients and outpatient encounters associated with patient recall of information after one week, along with observation of elements of shared decision making. This was an observational study based on coded transcripts of 189 outpatient encounters, and post-visit interviews with patients 1 week later. Coding used three previously validated systems, adopted for this study. Forty-nine percent of decisions and recommendations were recalled accurately without prompting; 36% recalled with a prompt; 15% recalled erroneously or not at all. Provider behaviors hypothesized to be associated with patient recall, such as open-questioning and "teach back," were rare. Patients with less than high school education recalled 38% of items freely and accurately, while patients with a college degree recalled 65% (p < .0001). In a multivariate model, the total number of items to be recalled per visit, and percentage of utterances in decision-making processes by the provider ("verbal dominance"), were significant predictors of poorer recall. The item count was associated with poorer recall for lower, but not higher, educated patients.
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.