Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38395022›Full record

ArticlePatient education and counseling2024

Discriminatory and valuing communication behaviors in cardiology encounters.

Kathryn I Pollak, Clemontina A Davenport, Veronica Duck, Allison Falls, Sara Pepka, Victoria Parente, Larry R Jackson, Kimberly S Johnson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient education and counseling, 2024. 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. Article
  2. 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

8 authors.

Kathryn I PollakCancer Prevention and Control, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC, USA; Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA. Electronic address: kathryn.pollak@duke.edu.
Clemontina A DavenportDepartment of Biostatistics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Veronica DuckCancer Prevention and Control, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC, USA.
Allison FallsDepartment of Psychology, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Sara PepkaDepartment of Psychology, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Victoria ParenteDepartment of Pediatrics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Larry R JacksonDepartment of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
Kimberly S JohnsonDepartment of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA; Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center (GRECC), Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.

Funding

Research Project 3U54MD012530 · NIMHD · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI JOHNSON, KIMBERLY S. · 2017 to 2022
$8.8M
Duke Center for Advancement of Child Health (CAtCH)K12HD105253 · NICHD · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI Corinne Mary Linardic, Ann M. Reed · 2021 to 2026
$1.5M
NICHD NIH HHS K12 HD105253NIMHD NIH HHS U54 MD012530
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveMany have found racial differences in clinician-patient communication using validated codebooks that represent effective communication. No codebooks used for examining racial differences, however, have included patient input. In this paper, we describe creating codebook with Black patient advocates to determine if we could reliably code discriminatory/valuing communication and assess racial differences in these behaviors.

methodsWe created a codebook for discriminatory/valuing communication behaviors with the input of Black patient advocates. We used the codebook to analyze data from 101 audio recorded encounters between White cardiologists and Black and White patients. We examined the differences in the prevalence of behaviors in cardiology encounters.

resultsIn comparison to White patients, cardiologists made fewer tailoring statements to their Black patients (68% vs. 49%, p = 0.07). Coders found 4 instances of stereotyping behaviors and only Black patients (p = 0.12). We found no significant associations between any of the other outcomes and patient race. Black patients had a lower incidence of tailoring statements (p = 0.13), lower incidence of interrupting statements (p = 0.16), and higher rushed global score (p = 0.14). CONCLUSION AND PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: We found that coders can reliably identify discriminatory/valuing behaviors in cardiology encounters. Future work should apply these codes to other datasets to assess their validity and generalizability.

Indexed as

CardiologyCommunicationPhysician-Patient RelationsSocial DiscriminationBlack or African AmericanHumansWhiteAudio-recorded encountersCardiologyDiscriminatory behaviorsRace differences

Identifiers

PMID38395022
PMCPMC10997491

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.