Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31081368›Full record

ArticleJournal of health psychology2021

Making expertise fit: On the use of certified versus experiential knowledge in becoming an informed patient.

Wytske Versteeg, Hedwig Te Molder

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of health psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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.

Wytske VersteegUtrecht University, The Netherlands.
Hedwig Te MolderWageningen University, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0599-8338

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article reports a discursive psychological study of online conversations among patients with ADHD, diabetes, or ALS on what constitutes an "informed patient." Being informed means different things for different patient groups. Whether patients prioritize experiential or certified expert knowledge is not indicative of patients' preferences per se but depends on how they give meaning to the responsibilities particular to their disease. ADHD patients hold each other accountable for demonstrating the seriousness of their disease. ALS patients use expert information to orient to a norm of thinking positive. Diabetes patients challenge experts to carve out independence from the diabetes regimen.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusPatient PreferenceCommunicationHumanschronic illnesscommunicationcopingepistemologyexperienceinformationnormsself-presentationsocial interactionsocial media

Identifiers

PMID31081368
PMCPMC8083077

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.