Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31102374›Full record

ArticleJMIR human factors2019

Communicating Bad News: Insights for the Design of Consumer Health Technologies.

Eun Kyoung Choe, Marisa E Duarte, Hyewon Suh, Wanda Pratt, Julie A Kientz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR human factors, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. MedQA-CS: Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE)-Style Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Clinical Skills.Proceedings of the conference. Association for Computational Linguistics. European Chapter. Conference · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Eun Kyoung ChoeCollege of Information Studies, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5038-8320
Marisa E DuarteSchool of Social Transformation, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3877-2797
Hyewon SuhHuman Centered Design and Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8017-9490
Wanda PrattInformation School, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4035-0198
Julie A KientzHuman Centered Design and Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7437-7861
University of Washington · USArizona State University · USUniversity of Maryland, College Park · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs people increasingly receive personal health information through technology, there is increased importance for this information to be communicated with empathy and consideration for the patient's experience of consuming it. Although technology enables people to have more frequent and faster access to their health information, it could also cause unnecessary anxiety, distress, or confusion because of the sensitive and complex nature of the information and its potential to provide information that could be considered bad news.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to uncover insights for the design of health information technologies that potentially communicate bad news about health such as the result of a diagnosis, increased risk for a chronic or terminal disease, or overall declining health.

methodsOn the basis of a review of established guidelines for clinicians on communicating bad news, we developed an interview guide and conducted interviews with patients, patients' family members, and clinicians on their experience of delivering and receiving the diagnosis of a serious disease. We then analyzed the data using a thematic analysis to identify overall themes from a perspective of identifying ways to translate these strategies to technology design.

resultsWe describe qualitative results combining an analysis of the clinical guidelines for sharing bad health news with patients and interviews on clinicians' specific strategies to communicate bad news and the emotional and informational support that patients and their family members seek. Specific strategies clinicians use included preparing for the patients' visit, anticipating patients' feelings, building a partnership of trust with patients, acknowledging patients' physical and emotional discomfort, setting up a scene where patients can process the information, helping patients build resilience and giving hope, matching the level of information to the patients' level of understanding, communicating face-to-face, if possible, and using nonverbal means. Patient and family member experiences included internal turmoil and emotional distress when receiving bad news and emotional and informational support that patients and family members seek.

conclusionsThe results from this study identify specific strategies for health information technologies to better promote empathic communication when they communicate concerning health news. We distill the findings from our study into design hypotheses for ways technologies may be able to help people better cope with the possibility of receiving bad health news, including tailoring the delivery of information to the patients' individual preferences, supporting interfaces for sharing patients' context, mitigating emotional stress from self-monitoring data, and identifying clear, actionable steps patients can take next.

Indexed as

eHealthempathyhealth communicationmHealthmobile healthpatient-centered care

Identifiers

PMID31102374
PMCPMC6543800
OpenAlexW2946709386

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.