ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2024
Agenda Setting in Outpatient Consultation of Older Adults With Long-COVID.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionAgenda setting in doctor-patient interaction refers to the process when various agendas are presented and responded to. This study revealed how Long-COVID (LC) agenda items are managed by older adults and doctors during outpatient consultations.
methodsBased on audio recordings, we adopted Conversation Analysis (CA) to unveil under what circumstances the patient or the doctor set the agenda and how they collaboratively work to develop an LC topic. Data was transcribed in accordance with the transcription conventions developed by Jefferson.
resultsAgendas were divided into three categories, namely primary, additional, and unmet agenda items. LC agendas were identified with specific characteristics based on qualitative analysis and older adults tended to seek more medical assistance, particularly concerning their chronic diseases. We observed that patients initiate agendas more often than doctors and it could happen at any stage of the visit, both parties can resist expanding the agenda, mostly in an indirect way, and agendas that contain more information with simpler turn-constructions are more likely to be well-addressed.
conclusionsBetter quality of consultation was found when doctors sensitively detect the emotional change and the potential issues of the patients when they prevaricate to avoid the relevance of the previous infection. The findings also suggested that understanding the dynamics of agenda setting in consultations could lead to improvements in medical visit outcomes. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients and doctors in the study were colleagues in a university hospital. They were involved in various stages of this study to ensure it addresses real-world concerns and improves healthcare outcomes. Throughout data collection, patients contributed by allowing their consultations to be recorded and providing feedback on their experiences. Findings were discussed with a patient advisory group to ensure the interpretations aligned with patient perspectives. Doctors were also actively engaged in disseminating the results through later consultations, ensuring broad accessibility and practical application of the research 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.