ArticleIntractable & rare diseases research2023
Trust in physicians and definitive diagnosis time among Japanese patients with specific intractable diseases: A cross-sectional study.
Article in Intractable & rare diseases research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Repercussions of Diagnostic Delay in Rare Diseases.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Review
- Emotional journey of patients with specified intractable diseases in Japan.Intractable & rare diseases research · 2024Article
- Unveiling Patient Trust in Physicians Across China: Insights from a Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2024Article
- Challenges associated with delayed definitive diagnosis among Japanese patients with specific intractable diseases: A cross-sectional study.Intractable & rare diseases research · 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Trust in physicians is an important metric in shared decision-making. Many patients with rare diseases experience misdiagnosis or delayed diagnosis because of difficulties in diagnosis or access to specialists. What impact do these have on trust in physicians? This study focused on patients with rare diseases, evaluated the effects of a delayed diagnosis and misdiagnosis on trust in physicians, and clarified the backgrounds of patients who have experienced delayed diagnoses. Patients with any of the 334 intractable diseases in Japan were registered, and a questionnaire survey was conducted on 1,000 valid registrations. Scores were calculated on a five-point Likert scale, and Cronbach's alpha coefficient was calculated to determine internal consistency, which was 0.973. Independent sample t-tests and analysis of variance were used to compare average trust scores based on patient demographics. The mean trust in physician score of patients who waited ≤ 1 year until definitive diagnosis was 47.66 ± 11.69, while those of patients who waited > 1 year was 45.07 ± 11.63 (
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.