Observational studyBMC geriatrics2025
Clinicians' tolerance for uncertainty and communication about uncertainty with older adults -a standardized patient assessment study.
Observational study in BMC geriatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUncertainty is omnipresent in care for older adults. Resident-physicians may be challenged to manage and communicate about such uncertainty. We aimed to 1) describe how resident-physicians discussed uncertainty with an older adult patient and involved them in decisions; and 2) assess how resident-physicians’ tolerance for uncertainty predicted communication about uncertainty and efforts towards patient involvement.
methodsA video-recorded, standardized patient assessment study was conducted involving resident-physicians in internal medicine. Participants conducted online consultations with a standardized geriatric patient. Self-report questionnaires assessed participants’ tolerance for uncertainty, feelings of ambivalence, and satisfaction with communication. Systematic observational coding assessed how residents communicated about uncertainty and involved the patient in decision-making. Descriptive statistics and correlations between observed communication and self-report measures were tested.
resultsResidents (N = 37) expressed uncertainty on average 14 times per consultation (range 7–24), most often implicitly (67%). They primarily used information focused approaches (72%, e.g., explaining uncertainty). Emotion-focused approaches were scarcer (21%, e.g., facilitating patients’ coping with uncertainty). Tolerance for uncertainty was relatively high, and unrelated to residents’ uncertainty communication. Residents involved the patient in decision making to an acceptable degree. Patient involvement was not associated with residents’ uncertainty tolerance. Consultations with higher patient involvement included more frequent uncertainty expressions by residents (rp=0.38, p = .02).
conclusionsMore solid evidence is needed on the relation between residents’ uncertainty tolerance and communication within care for older adult patients. Research evidence could guide reflective education to support residents in managing uncertainty, as well as skills training to enhance uncertainty communication.
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.