Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38704562›Full record

ArticleBMC primary care2024

Patient experiences of information-sharing and patient-centred care across the broad landscape of primary care practice and provision: a nationally representative survey of Australian adults.

Amie Steel, Hope Foley, Kim Graham, Joanna Harnett, Jon Adams

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC primary care, 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

5 authors.

Amie SteelARCCIM, School of Public Health, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, 235-253 Jones St, Ultimo, NSW, Australia. Amie.steel@uts.edu.au.
Hope FoleyARCCIM, School of Public Health, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, 235-253 Jones St, Ultimo, NSW, Australia.
Kim GrahamARCCIM, School of Public Health, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, 235-253 Jones St, Ultimo, NSW, Australia.
Joanna HarnettSchool of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Jon AdamsARCCIM, School of Public Health, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, 235-253 Jones St, Ultimo, NSW, Australia.

Funding

Australian Research Council FT220100610
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAustralian government strategies and frameworks have been developed in recent years to encourage the integration and coordination of primary care delivery; including patient-centred approaches to clinical and preventative care, and health promotion. This study aims to explore patient experiences of information-sharing and patient-centred care across various primary care clinical settings, with a particular focus on clinical encounters with GPs, naturopaths, osteopaths and acupuncturists.

methodsData about healthcare utilisation and experiences from a 63-item cross-sectional survey obtained from a nationally representative sample of Australian adults aged ≥ 18 years were analysed. Chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis H tests were used to explore differences in the experiences of knowledge and information sharing during GP consultations among those who also consulted with a naturopath, osteopath or acupuncturist, compared those who had not. Logistic regression was used to investigate correlations between participants perceptions about GP consultation outcomes, and the GP's information-sharing behaviour or perceived experience of patient-centredness.

resultsAcross 2354 participants, verbal explanation (76.3%) and/or individualised handouts (16.8%) were the most common type of information shared in GP consultations. Individuals who consulted with a GP and a naturopath, an osteopath, or an acupuncturist reported a lower rate of receiving a verbal explanation from their GP but higher rate of receiving other types of information sources including handouts. Over one quarter of study participants who visited a GP did not discuss any of their health information with their GP. Information sharing was lower for individuals who also visited a naturopath, osteopath or acupuncturist. Participants scored their consultations with a GP as patient-centred, but these scores were lower among participants who also consulted with at least one other primary care practitioner type included in the study.

conclusionsPublic health and health services researchers, policymakers and leaders of primary care professions have a role and responsibility to ensure practitioners are confident and competent in sharing health information with their patients that considers their health literacy needs, and the importance of patient-centred care. Research focussed on a more in-depth understanding of the differences and relationships observed across the primary care landscape in this study is recommended.

Indexed as

Patient-Centered CarePrimary Health CareAdolescentAdultAgedAustraliaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansInformation DisseminationMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionPhysician-Patient RelationsYoung AdultHealth promotionKnowledge mobilisationPatient educationPatient expertPrimary careShared decision-making

Identifiers

PMID38704562
PMCPMC11070095

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.