ArticleJournal of chiropractic medicine2025
Interpersonal Process of Care Experience of Patients Receiving Care at a Chiropractic Outpatient Teaching Clinic.
Article in Journal of chiropractic medicine, 2025. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to examine the interpersonal process of care (IPC) experience of patients receiving care at 1 chiropractic college. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, respondents attending care at the Sherman College of Chiropractic outpatient clinic completed a survey (July 2016 to June 2017) to provide their sociodemographic and clinical information and complete an adapted version of the IPC-18 to assess their IPC experience with chiropractic care. Principal component analysis and k-means cluster analysis determined natural groupings/clusters of respondents. Random forest modeling determined factors predictive of shared decision-making. Results: Ninety-nine patients (41 males, 44 females, and 14 unknown) responded. The largest group of respondents was aged 40 to 55 years and highly educated. Principal component analysis found that the first dimension was strongly influenced by the IPC-18 subscale of communication (ie, elicited concerns, explained results, and decided together). The second dimension was strongly influenced by interpersonal style (ie, disrespectful office staff). The third and fourth dimensions were strongly influenced by communication (ie, lack of clarity) and interpersonal style (ie, discrimination due to race/ethnicity), respectively. The most important predictors for shared decision-making were communication (ie, chiropractor/intern explained the results of examination findings and elicited the patient's concerns and took them seriously) and interpersonal style (ie, the patient was treated as an equal). Patient age and presenting symptoms were also important predictors of shared decision-making. Conclusion: The IPC experience of patients under care was dominantly positive, cooperative, and equitable with their chiropractor/interns and office staff. Factors predictive of shared clinical decision-making included good communication and a positive interpersonal style with the provider.
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.