ArticlePEC innovation2022
Examining how physician factors influence patient satisfaction during clinical consultations about cancer prognosis and pain.
Article in PEC innovation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Cancer Pain: A Systematic Review.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2024Pooled it
- Between Patient Pressure and Professional Responsibility: Antibiotic Prescribing Practices in Primary Care.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- When can cancer patient treatment nonadherence be considered intentional or unintentional? A scoping review.PloS one · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Patient-physician communication affects cancer patients' satisfaction, health outcomes, and reimbursement for physician services. Our objective is to use machine learning to comprehensively examine the association between patient satisfaction and physician factors in clinical consultations about cancer prognosis and pain. Methods: We used data from audio-recorded, transcribed communications between physicians and standardized patients (SPs). We analyzed the data using logistic regression (LR) and random forests (RF). Results: The LR models suggested that lower patient satisfaction was associated with more in-depth prognosis discussion; and higher patient satisfaction was associated with a greater extent of shared decision making, patient being black, and doctor being young. Conversely, the RF models suggested the opposite association with the same set of variables. Conclusion: Somewhat contradicting results from distinct machine learning models suggested possible confounding factors (hidden variables) in prognosis discussion, shared decision-making, and doctor age, on the modeling of patient satisfaction. Practitioners should not make inferences with one single data-modeling method and enlarge the study cohort to help deal with population heterogeneity. Innovation: Comparing diverse machine learning models (both parametric and non-parametric types) and carefully applying variable selection methods prior to regression modeling, can enrich the examination of physician factors in characterizing patient-physician communication outcomes.
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.