Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40960826›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2025

A Novel Communication Rating Scale to Mitigate the Effect of Implicit Bias.

Jennifer Tjia, Chengwu Yang, Julie Flahive, Kelly Harrison, Geraldine Puerto, Vennesa Duodu, Lisa A Cooper, Olga Valdman, Janice Sabin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Jennifer TjiaDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, UMass Chan Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts.
Chengwu YangDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, UMass Chan Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts.
Julie FlahiveDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, UMass Chan Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts.
Kelly HarrisonDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Connecticut, Farmington.
Geraldine PuertoDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, UMass Chan Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts.
Vennesa DuoduDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, UMass Chan Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts.
Lisa A CooperSchool of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Olga ValdmanDepartment of Family Medicine, UMass Chan Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts.
Janice SabinDepartment of Biomedical Informatics and Medical Education, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle.

Funding

COmuNity-engaged SimULation Training for Blood Pressure Control (CONSULT-BP)R01MD011532 · NIMHD · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI TJIA, JENNIFER · 2017 to 2021
$3.9M
NIMHD NIH HHS R01 MD011532
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Implicit bias recognition and management (IBRM) training is a promising strategy for improving clinician communication but is underevaluated. Objective: To describe the development and psychometric properties of the Respect, Empathize, Listen, Ask, Talk, and Engage (RELATE) rating scale, based on a theoretical framework of communication skills, to mitigate negative influences of implicit bias by using strategies for interrupting unconscious decision-making in patient-centered communication. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, between September 2019 and April 2022, standardized patients used the RELATE rating scale to evaluate communication skills of participating clinical trainees at an academic medical center who completed an IBRM training and engaged in simulated clinical encounters with standardized patients representing those with low socioeconomic status and African American, Latino or Hispanic, and African immigrant patients. Statistical analyses were ongoing from June 2021 to January 2024. Main Outcome and Measures: Gwet agreement coefficient (AC) was calculated using data from the 2019 to 2020 cohort year to assess standardized patient interrater reliability (IRR). To assess construct validity and internal consistency reliability, factor analysis techniques were used, and Cronbach α was calculated using data from 3 cohorts (2019-2020, 2020-2021, and 2021-2022). Results: Twenty-seven standardized patients generated 226 independent RELATE ratings for 123 consenting clinical trainees (14 family medicine residents [11.4%], 48 internal medicine residents [39.0%], and 61 doctor of nursing practice students [49.6%]; mean [SD] age, 30.4 [4.1] years; 82 [66.7%] female), who each had 2 RELATE scores. Of the 3-level item responses of whether a behavior was observed ("present," "partial," or "absent"), for all 19 items, at least 1 trainee (0.4%) was noted who did not complete the evaluated behavior, and all items had some responses of "partial" (range, 13 [5.8%] to 70 [31.0%]). Twelve of the 19 RELATE items (63.2%) showed either substantial or almost perfect IRR (Gwet AC, >0.60), and 6 items (31.6%) had moderate IRR (Gwet AC, 0.41-0.60). Factor analyses resulted in a final 4-factor solution with excellent model fit indices and strong factor loadings: respect (4 items), empathy (5 items), listening and talking (6 items), and engaging in partnership with patients (4 items). Each factor showed sound internal consistency (Cronbach α range, 0.64-0.77). Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study of the RELATE rating scale demonstrated high construct validity and good internal consistency in simulated clinician-patient encounters. The findings suggest that the RELATE rating scale is an efficient, theoretically consistent tool to evaluate implicit bias-management communication behavior among clinicians.

Indexed as

CommunicationPhysician-Patient RelationsAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansInternship and ResidencyMalePsychometricsReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID40960826
PMCPMC12444548

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.