Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29672201›Full record

SynthesisJournal of the Royal Society of Medicine2018

Effects of empathic and positive communication in healthcare consultations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jeremy Howick, Andrew Moscrop, Alexander Mebius, Thomas R Fanshawe, George Lewith, Felicity L Bishop, Patriek Mistiaen, Nia W Roberts, Eglė Dieninytė, Xiao-Yang Hu and 2 more

Erratum issuedAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 173 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
173citing papers in PubMed, 10 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

173 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Challenges in the Medical and Psychosocial Care of the Paediatric Refugee-A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Patient experiences of a care transition intervention for Veterans to reduce emergency department visits.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2023
    Trial
  16. Operating on Anxiety: Negative Affect toward Breast Cancer and Choosing Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2023
    Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

113 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Jeremy Howick1 Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 2JD, UK.
Andrew Moscrop1 Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 2JD, UK.
Alexander Mebius1 Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 2JD, UK.
Thomas R Fanshawe1 Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 2JD, UK.
George Lewith2 Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK.
Felicity L Bishop2 Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK.
Patriek Mistiaen3 Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre (KCE), Brussels B-1000, Belgium.
Nia W Roberts4 Bodleian Health Care Libraries, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 2JD, UK.
Eglė Dieninytė5 Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius LT-03101, Lithuania.
Xiao-Yang Hu2 Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK.
Paul Aveyard1 Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 2JD, UK.
Igho J Onakpoya1 Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 2JD, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Practitioners who enhance how they express empathy and create positive expectations of benefit could improve patient outcomes. However, the evidence in this area has not been recently synthesised. Objective To estimate the effects of empathy and expectations interventions for any clinical condition. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials. Data sources Six databases from inception to August 2017. Study selection Randomised trials of empathy or expectations interventions in any clinical setting with patients aged 12 years or older. Review methods Two reviewers independently screened citations, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and graded quality of evidence using GRADE. Random effects model was used for meta-analysis. Results We identified 28 eligible (n = 6017). In seven trials, empathic consultations improved pain, anxiety and satisfaction by a small amount (standardised mean difference -0.18 [95% confidence interval -0.32 to -0.03]). Twenty-two trials tested the effects of positive expectations. Eighteen of these (n = 2014) reported psychological outcomes (mostly pain) and showed a modest benefit (standardised mean difference -0.43 [95% confidence interval -0.65 to -0.21]); 11 (n = 1790) reported physical outcomes (including bronchial function/ length of hospital stay) and showed a small benefit (standardised mean difference -0.18 [95% confidence interval -0.32 to -0.05]). Within 11 trials (n = 2706) assessing harms, there was no evidence of adverse effects (odds ratio 1.04; 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 1.63). The risk of bias was low. The main limitations were difficulties in blinding and high heterogeneity for some comparisons. Conclusions Greater practitioner empathy or communication of positive messages can have small patient benefits for a range of clinical conditions, especially pain. Protocol registration Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (protocol) DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011934.pub2.

Indexed as

CommunicationEmpathyHumansPhysician-Patient RelationsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReferral and ConsultationCommunicationevidence-based practicefamily medicine

Identifiers

PMID29672201
PMCPMC6047264

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.