ArticleBMJ open2020
Knowing what the patient wants: a hospital ethnography studying physician culture in shared decision making in the Netherlands.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fostering Patient Choice Awareness and Presenting Treatment Options Neutrally: A Randomized Trial to Assess the Effect on Perceived Room for Involvement in Decision Making.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022Trial
- "I don't know whether I really have choices": a multiperspective and longitudinal exploration of healthcare choices of older adults with multimorbidity.The Gerontologist · 2026Article
- Impact of a training program on gastroenterology health care professionals' patient-centered shared decision-making: a pilot study.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Article
- Is shared decision making an aspect of palliative care integration? An observation of collaboration between oncologists and palliative care professionals.BMC palliative care · 2024Observational
- Unravelling clinicians' shared decision-making adoption: a qualitative exploration through the lens of diffusion of innovations theory.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Is it fun or is it hard? Studying physician-related attributes of shared decision-making by ranking case vignettes.PEC innovation · 2023Article
- Cancer treatments touch a wide range of values that count for patients and other stakeholders: What are the implications for decision-making?Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Learning from the implementation of clinical empathy training: an explorative qualitative study in search of the barriers and facilitators.BMC medical education · 2022Article
- Understanding the Digital Disruption of Health Care: An Ethnographic Study of Real-Time Multidisciplinary Clinical Behavior in a New Digital Hospital.Applied clinical informatics · 2022Article
- Universal healthcare coverage, patients' rights, and nurse-patient communication: a critical review of the evidence.BMC nursing · 2022Review
- Harnessing Bourdieu's social theory to understand the deteriorating doctor-patient-nurse relationship in West Bengal government hospitals.Frontiers in sociology · 2022Article
- Medical and Nonmedical Information during Multidisciplinary Team Meetings in Cancer Care.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo study physician culture in relation to shared decision making (SDM) practice.
designExecution of a hospital ethnography, combined with interviews and a study of clinical guidelines. Ten-week observations by an insider (physician) and an outsider (student medical anthropology) observer. The use of French sociologist Bourdieu's 'Theory of Practice' and its description of habitus, field and capital, as a lens for analysing physician culture.
settingThe gynaecological oncology department of a university hospital in the Netherlands. Observations were executed at meetings, as well as individual patient contacts.
participantsSix gynaecological oncologists, three registrars and two specialised nurses. Nine of these professionals were also interviewed.
main outcome measuresCommon elements in physician habitus that influence the way SDM is being implemented.
resultsThree main elements of physician habitus were identified. First of all, the 'emphasis on medical evidence' in group meetings as well as in patient encounters. Second 'acting as a team', which confronts the patient with the recommendations of a whole team of professionals. And lastly 'knowing what the patient wants', which describes how doctors act on what they think is best for patients instead of checking what patients actually want. Results were viewed in the light of how physicians deal with uncertainty by turning to medical evidence, as well as how the educational system stresses evidence-based medicine. Observations also highlighted the positive attitude doctors actually have towards SDM.
conclusionsCertain features of physician culture hinder the correct implementation of SDM. Medical training and guidelines should put more emphasis on how to elicit patient perspective. Patient preferences should be addressed better in the patient workup, for example by giving them explicit attention first. This eventually could create a physician culture that is more helpful for SDM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.