ArticlePloS one2020
Concordance among patients and physicians about their ideal of autonomy impacts the patient-doctor relationship: A cross-sectional study of Mexican patients with rheumatic diseases.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Effect of Ambient Voice Technology, Natural Language Processing, and Artificial Intelligence on the Patient-Physician Relationship.Applied clinical informatics · 2024Observational
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 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn patient-doctor interaction both parties play a role. Primary objective was to determine if the concordance among rheumatologists and their patients of their ideal of autonomy was associated with a better patient-doctor relationship. Secondary objective was to describe factors associated to a patient paternalistic ideal of autonomy (PPIA). MATERIALS AND
methodsThis cross-sectional study had 3 steps. Step-1 consisted in translation/cultural local adaption of Ideal Patient Autonomy Scale (IPAS), a 14-items Dutch questionnaire. Step-2 consisted of IPAS validity and reliability in 201 outpatients. Step-3 consisted of the application of IPAS and the patient-doctor relationship questionnaire (PDRQ) to 601 outpatients with a medical encounter, and of IPAS to the 21 attending rheumatologists. Each patient-physician encounter was classified into with/without concordance in the ideal of autonomy and PRDQ scores were compared (Man Whitney U test). Regression analysis was used for associations.
resultsStep-1 followed ISPOR task force recommendations. Patients from Step-2 and Step-3 were representative outpatients with rheumatic diseases. IPAS structure underwent a modification; the 14 items were redistributed into four subscales, further combined into PPIA vs. patient-centered autonomy ideal. IPAS was valid and reliable. There were 497 patients with a preferred ideal of autonomy, primarily (84.9%) PPIA. There were 363 patient-doctor encounters with concordance in the autonomy ideal and their PDRQ-9 scores were higher. Religious beliefs and higher PDRQ-9 item 8 score ("I feel pleased with my doctor´s treatment") were associated to a PPIA.
conclusionsConcordance of autonomy ideal among patients and their rheumatologists positively impacts on the patient-doctor relationship.
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.