ArticleFrontiers in medicine2023
When does doctor's recommendation become patient's resolution? The regulatory potential of procedural justice in the context of compliance with medical advice and the treatment process.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- From violation to stigma: a literature review of athletes' lived experiences following anti-doping sanctions.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Review
- Application of Genetic Testing for Anorexia Nervosa: An Ethical Analysis.Brain and behavior · 2025Article
- Perspective and Experience of Patients with Aplastic Anemia on Medication Adherence.Patient preference and adherence · 2023Article
- Translation of the working alliance inventory short revised into Italian using a Delphi procedure and a forward-backward translation.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- The Impact of Procedural Justice and Trust on Customers' Continuity Intention Toward Healthcare Providers.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The main aim of the study was to find empirical evidence to answer the following question: If an important personal interest-namely, health and the prospect of a long life-is not enough to motivate a person to follow recommendations from doctors and medical experts, what factor plays a significant role? The author tested the regulatory potential of procedural justice in this context. The sample consisted of 210 participants, patients of independent primary healthcare facilities and specialist hospital outpatient clinics. The empirical data were analyzed by means of structural equation modeling (SEM). Seven SEM models were tested in the analyses. The adopted analytical strategy brought valuable results. The study supported the main hypothesized relationship, showing that procedural justice was a factor increasing the acceptance of and compliance with medical advice and doctor's perceived competence. The results of analyses indicate that the fair treatment of patients in healthcare institutions can be regarded as a significant factor regulating patients' health behavior. The procedural effect is significant for increasing patients' positive evaluation of doctors' competence. Also, the evaluation of a doctor as competent increases patient compliance.
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.