Clinician-patient communication measures: drilling down into assumptions, approaches, and analyses
Name:
Publisher version
View Source
Access full-text PDFOpen Access
View Source
Check access options
Check access options
Document Type
Journal ArticlePublication Date
2017-08-01Keywords
Communication measurementMatching measures to research questions
Patient-centered communication
Health Communication
Health Services Administration
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To critically examine properties of clinician-patient communication measures and offer suggestions for selecting measures appropriate to the purposes of research or clinical practice assessment. METHODS: We analyzed different types of communication measures by focusing on their ontological properties. We describe their relative advantages and disadvantages with respect to different types of research questions. RESULTS: Communication measures vary along dimensions of reporter (observer vs. participant), focus of measurement (behavior, meaning, or quality), target, and timing. Observer coded measures of communication behavior function well as dependent variables (e.g., evaluating communication skill interventions, examining variability related to gender or race), but are less effective as predictors of perceptions and health outcomes. Measures of participants' judgments (e.g., what the communication means or how well it was done) capture patients' or clinicians' experiences (e.g., satisfaction) and can be useful for predicting outcomes, especially in longitudinal designs. CONCLUSION: In the absence of a theoretically coherent set of measures that could be used across research programs and applied setting, users should take steps to select measures with properties that are optimally matched to specific questions. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Quality assessments of clinician-patient communication should take into account the timing of the assessment and use measures that drill down into specific aspects of patient experience to mitigate ceiling effects.Source
Patient Educ Couns. 2017 Aug;100(8):1612-1618. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2017.03.021. Epub 2017 Mar 18. Link to article on publisher's siteDOI
10.1016/j.pec.2017.03.021Permanent Link to this Item
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/29136PubMed ID
28359660Related Resources
Link to Article in PubMedae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1016/j.pec.2017.03.021