Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31411716›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2019

Assessment of Patient Nondisclosures to Clinicians of Experiencing Imminent Threats.

Andrea Gurmankin Levy, Aaron M Scherer, Brian J Zikmund-Fisher, Knoll Larkin, Geoffrey D Barnes, Angela Fagerlin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Barriers to emergency department usage during the COVID-19 pandemic.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2020
    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

6 authors.

Andrea Gurmankin LevyDepartment of Social Science, Middlesex Community College, Middletown, Connecticut.
Aaron M SchererDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City.
Brian J Zikmund-FisherSchool of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Knoll LarkinDepartment of Oncology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, Michigan.
Geoffrey D BarnesUniversity of Michigan Health System, Cardiovascular Medicine and Vascular Medicine, Ann Arbor.
Angela FagerlinDepartment of Population Health Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Patient disclosure to their clinician about experiencing an imminent threat is a critical step toward receiving support or assistance. Objective: To examine the frequency of patients not disclosing their experience of imminent threats to their clinician and their reasons for doing so. Design, Setting, and Participants: Survey study incorporating results from 2 national, nonprobability samples of 2011 US adults recruited from Amazon's Mechanical Turk (MTurk) from March 16 to 30, 2015, and 2499 recruited from Survey Sampling International (SSI) from November 6 to 17, 2015. Data analysis was conducted from December 20 to 28, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Self-reported nondisclosure of 4 types of imminent threats (depression, suicidality, abuse, and sexual assault) to their clinician and reasons for nondisclosure. Results: There were 2011 participants in the MTurk sample (1210 [60.3%] female; 1696 [60.2%] white; mean [SD] age, 35.7 [12.4] years; age range, 18-79 years) and 2499 participants (1273 [51.0%] female; 1968 [78.8%] white; mean [SD] age, 61.0 [7.6] years; age range, 50-91 years) in the SSI sample. Among those who reported experiencing at least 1 of the 4 imminent threats, 613 of 1292 MTurk participants (47.5%) and 581 of 1453 SSI participants (40.0%) withheld information from their clinician. The most commonly endorsed reasons for withholding this information included being embarrassed (MTurk: 72.7%; SSI: 70.9%), not wanting to be judged or lectured (MTurk: 66.4%; SSI: 53.4%), and not wanting to engage in a difficult follow-up behavior (MTurk: 62.4%; SSI: 51.1%). Respondents who experienced at least 1 of the 4 imminent threats had significantly higher odds of nondisclosure in both samples if they were female (MTurk: odds ratio [OR], 1.66 [95% CI, 1.30-2.11]; and SSI: OR, 1.33 [95% CI, 1.07-1.67]) or younger (MTurk: OR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.98-1.00]; and SSI: OR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.97-1.00]). Worse self-rated health was also associated with nondisclosure, but only in the SSI sample (OR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.74-0.96]). Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that many people withhold information from their clinicians about imminent health threats that they face. A better understanding of how to increase patients' comfort with reporting this information is critical to allowing clinicians to help patients mitigate these potentially life-threatening risks.

Indexed as

Physician-Patient RelationsSelf DisclosureSuicidal IdeationAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCrowdsourcingDepressionFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CareSelf ReportSex Offenses

Identifiers

PMID31411716
PMCPMC6694393

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.