ArticleNeurology. Clinical practice2026
Clinician Communication About Uncertainty During Parkinson Disease Diagnostic Consultations.
Article in Neurology. Clinical practice, 2026. 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.
- Towards a Better Definition of Patient-Centered Therapeutic Strategy of Parkinson's Disease: An Opinion Paper.Neurology and therapy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesParkinson disease (PD) entails much uncertainty, regarding diagnosis, disease course, and treatment. How clinicians communicate about such uncertainty may affect patients' understanding of the information and their well-being. However, clinicians rarely receive formal training in how to optimally discuss uncertainty during diagnostic consultations. We assessed (1) how clinicians communicate about uncertainty, (2) how their communication about uncertainty predicts patients' feelings of uncertainty and trust, and (3) the moderating effect of clinicians' and patients' tolerance for uncertainty.
methodsWe recorded diagnostic consultations regarding PD (initial and follow-up within 6 weeks) for 50 patients. The frequencies of clinicians' verbal expressions of uncertainty were systematically coded for topic, initiative, explicitness, and communication approach. Moreover, clinicians' reactions on patients' and companions' uncertainty expressions were coded. Patients and clinicians completed multiple surveys assessing background characteristics, uncertainty tolerance, feelings of uncertainty, and trust. We conducted descriptive analyses and fitted mixed linear models.
resultsClinicians expressed uncertainty on average 20 times over both diagnostic consultations combined (range 6-67; 0.40 p/min). Most statements concerned medication (31%) and diagnosis (30%), and uncertainty was predominately conveyed implicitly (mean = 74%). The most frequently observed communication approach (30%) was outlining a plan to obtain more certainty. Patients or companions expressed uncertainty on average 12 times (range 1-29; 0.20 p/min), to which clinicians most often responded by providing more information (67%). Patients' feelings of uncertainty decreased after the diagnostic consultation(s). Clinicians' uncertainty tolerance was not associated with their uncertainty communication. Neither patients' nor clinicians' uncertainty tolerance moderated the association between uncertainty communication and patient-reported outcomes. DISCUSSION: Uncertainty is integral to PD diagnostic consultations and does not seem to have harmful effects on patient well-being. Its discussion often remains implicit and is strongly focused on justifying or reducing the uncertainty. More systematic research could assess the effects of various ways to convey uncertainty on patients' well-being and trust.
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.