Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29947157›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of health psychology2018

Initiating discussions about weight in a non-weight-specific setting: What can we learn about the interactional consequences of different communication practices from an examination of clinical consultations?

Susan A Speer, Rebecca McPhillips

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of health psychology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Talking about breast symmetry in the breast cancer clinic: What can we learn from an examination of clinical interaction?Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
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

2 authors.

Susan A SpeerDivision of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3048-2851
Rebecca McPhillipsDivision of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesEffective clinical communication is fundamental to tackling overweight and obesity. However, little is known about how weight is discussed in non-weight-specific settings where the primary purpose of the interaction concerns clinical matters apparently unrelated to weight. This study explores how mental health clinicians initiate discussions about a patient's possible weight problem in the non-weight-specific setting of a UK NHS Gender Identity Clinic (GIC), where weight is topicalized during discussions about the risks of treatment.

designA conversation analytic study.

methodsA total of 194 recordings of routine clinician-patient consultations were collected from the GIC. Weight talk was initiated by four clinicians in 43 consultations. Twenty-one instances contained reference to a possible weight problem. Transcripts were analysed using conversation analysis.

resultsClinicians used three communication practices to initiate discussion of a possible weight problem with patients: (1) announcing that patients are overweight; (2) asking patients whether they are overweight; and (3) deducing that patients are overweight or obese via a body mass index (BMI) calculation. Announcing that patients are overweight is the least aligning practice that denies patient's agency and grammatically constrains them to agree with a negative label. Asking patients whether they are overweight treats them as having limited agency and generates comparatively aligning, but occasionally resistant, responses. Jointly deducing that patients are overweight or obese via a BMI calculation is the most aligning practice, which deflects responsibility for labelling the patient onto an objective instrument.

conclusionsSmall differences in the wording of turns that initiate discussions about a possible weight problem can have significant consequences for interactional alignment. Clinicians from different specialities may benefit from considering the interactional consequences of different practices for initiating discussions about weight during the kinds of real-life discussions considered here. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? There is a correlation between clinical communication about weight and patient weight loss. Clinicians from all specialties are encouraged to discuss diet and exercise with patients, but communication about weight remains problematic. Health psychologists have identified an urgent need for communication training to raise sensitive topics like weight without damaging the doctor-patient relationship. What does this study add? Clinicians in a non-weight-specific setting use three communication practices to introduce the possibility that a patient's weight may be a problem. These practices have varying consequences for the interaction and doctor-patient relationship. Conversation analytic findings may be useful in training clinicians how to initiate discussions about weight with patients.

Indexed as

Body WeightPhysician-Patient RelationsBody Mass IndexHealth CommunicationHumansOverweightReferral and ConsultationUnited Kingdomclinical communicationconversation analysismedical interactionobesityoverweightpsychiatryweight

Identifiers

PMID29947157
PMCPMC6174938

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.