Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34750126›Full record

ArticleAnnals of family medicine

Clinician Response to Patient Emotion: Impact on Subsequent Communication and Visit Length.

Mary Catherine Beach, Jenny Park, Dingfen Han, Christopher Evans, Richard D Moore, Somnath Saha

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of family medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Cultivating hope: reframing the 'heart-sink' consultation.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Trust and Communication: Cornerstones of Care.North Carolina medical journal · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Pakikisama: Filipino Patient Perspectives on Health Care Access and Utilization.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM
    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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Mary Catherine BeachDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland mcbeach@jhmi.edu.
Jenny ParkDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Dingfen HanDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Christopher EvansDivision of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon.
Richard D MooreDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Somnath SahaDivision of General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon.
Johns Hopkins Medicine · USJohns Hopkins University · USOregon Health & Science University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIt is widely cited-based on limited evidence-that attending to a patient's emotions results in shorter visits because patients are less likely to repeat themselves if they feel understood. We evaluated the association of clinician responses to patient emotions with subsequent communication and visit length.

methodsWe audio-recorded 41 clinicians with 342 unique patients and used the Verona Coding Definitions of Emotional Sequences (VR-CoDES) to time stamp patient emotional expressions and categorize clinician responses. We used random-intercept multilevel-regression models to evaluate the associations of clinician responses with timing of the expressed emotion, patient repetition, and subsequent length of visit.

resultsThe mean visit length was 30.4 minutes, with 1,028 emotional expressions total. The majority of clinician responses provided space for the patient to elaborate on the emotion (81%) and were nonexplicit (56%). As each minute passed, clinicians had lower odds of providing space (odds ratio [OR] = 0.96; 95% CI, 0.95-0.98) and higher odds of being explicit (OR = 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.03). Emotions were more likely to be repeated when clinicians provided space (OR = 2.33; 95% CI, 1.66-3.27), and less likely to be repeated when clinicians were explicit (OR = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47-0.80). Visits were shorter (β = -0.98 minutes; 95% CI, -2.19 to 0.23) when clinicians' responses explicitly focused on patient affect.

conclusionIf saving time is a goal, clinicians should consider responses that explicitly address a patient's emotion. Arguments for providing space for patients to discuss emotional issues should focus on other benefits, including patients' well-being.

Indexed as

CommunicationPhysician-Patient RelationsEmotionsHumansbehavioremotionsempathyoffice visitspatient-clinician communicationpersonalized carepractice-based researchprimary carepsychological distresstime management

Identifiers

PMID34750126
PMCPMC8575526
OpenAlexW3211563295

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.