Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37584682›Full record

ReviewRadiologie (Heidelberg, Germany)2023

[Patient-centered radiology : What patients want from radiologists].

Andreas G Schreyer

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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

1 author.

Andreas G SchreyerInstitut für Diagnostische und interventionelle Radiologie, Universitätsklinikum Brandenburg a.d. Havel, Medizinische Hochschule Brandenburg Theodor Fontane, Hochstr. 29, 14770, Brandenburg a.d. Havel, Deutschland. andreas.schreyer@mac.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the transition from volume-based to value-based radiology, patient communication plays a crucial role in terms of patient-centeredness in radiology. This overview article aims to describe various patient contact situations in a radiology setting and discuss them based on current literature, including any recommendations for action if applicable.

objectivesWhat do patients wish for from radiologists? MATERIALS AND

methodsDigital literature research with a narrative summary of important publications on patient-centeredness in the context of communication in the radiology-patient relationship.

resultsThere is limited literature available in most areas regarding communication between radiology and patients. The most common type of literature found is surveys that assess patients' opinions, which sometimes yield divergent results regarding preferences for direct communication with radiologists after the examination. However, it has been shown that direct patient conversations and an empathetic physician-patient relationship allow for a positive evaluation of radiology and foster a sense of appreciation.

conclusionAs we transition from volume-based to value-based radiology, it will be crucial for radiology to optimize the physician-patient relationship through improved communication, both verbally and by utilizing new media.

Indexed as

RadiologyHumansPatient-Centered CarePatientsRadiographyRadiologistsArtificial intelligenceHealth policyPatient carePhysician–patient relationRadiology

Identifiers

PMID37584682

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.