Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33285012›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2021

I am ready to see you now, Doctor! A mixed-method study of the Let's Discuss Health website implementation in Primary Care.

Marie-Thérèse Lussier, Claude Richard, Fatoumata Binta Diallo, Nathalie Boivin, Catherine Hudon, Élie Boustani, Holly Witteman, Jalila Jbilou

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. The psychological consequences of living with coronary heart disease: Are patients' psychological needs served? A mixed-method study in Germany.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  3. I am ready to see you now, Doctor! A mixed-method study of the Let's Discuss Health website implementation in Primary Care.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021
    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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Marie-Thérèse LussierDepartment of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8242-9868
Claude RichardLaval Integrated Health and Social Services Centre (Centre de santé et des services sociaux de Laval), Groupe de recherche sur les transformations des pratiques cliniques et organisationnelles, Laval, QC, Canada.
Fatoumata Binta DialloLaval Integrated Health and Social Services Centre (Centre de santé et des services sociaux de Laval), Groupe de recherche sur les transformations des pratiques cliniques et organisationnelles, Laval, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1423-3417
Nathalie BoivinÉcole réseau de Science infirmière (ÉRSI), University of Moncton, Moncton, NB, Canada.
Catherine HudonDepartment of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, University of Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada.
Élie BoustaniDepartment of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Holly WittemanDepartment of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Laval University, Laval, QC, Canada.
Jalila JbilouCentre de formation médicale du Nouveau Brunswick, Université de Sherbrooke, École de psychologie, University of Moncton, Moncton, NB, Canada.
Centre Integre de Sante et de Services Sociaux de Laval · CAUniversité de Sherbrooke · CAUniversité de Moncton · CAUniversité de Montréal · CAUniversité Laval · CA

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLet's Discuss Health (LDH) is a website that encourages patients to prepare their health-care encounters by providing communication training, review of topics and questions that are important to them.

objectiveTo describe LDH implementation during primary care (PC) visits for chronic illnesses.

methodsDesign: Descriptive mixed-method study.

setting6 PC clinics.

participants156 patients and 51 health-care providers (HCP).

interventionLDH website implementation. OUTCOME MEASURES: Perceived quality and usefulness of LDH; perceived quality of HCP-patient communication; patient activation; LDH integration in routine PC practices and barriers to its use.

resultsPatients reported a positive perception of the website in that it helped them to adopt an active role in the encounters; recall their visit agenda and reduce encounter-related stress; feel more confident to ask questions, feel more motivated to prepare their future medical visits and improve their chronic illness management. However, a certain disconnect emerged between HCP and patient perceptions as to the value of LDH in promoting a sense of partnership and collaboration. The main barriers to the use of LDH are HCP lack of interest, limited access to technology, lack of time and language barriers.

conclusionOur findings indicate that it is advantageous for patients to prepare their medical encounters. However, the study needs to be replicated in other medical environments using larger and more diverse samples. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patient partners were involved in the conduct of this study.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelPhysiciansCommunicationHumansPrimary Health Caredoctor-patient relationshipmedical encounterpatient activationpatient engagementpatient participationpersonal health recordsweb strategies

Identifiers

PMID33285012
PMCPMC8077096
OpenAlexW3110928507

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.