The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Soliciting the Patient's Agenda: Have We Improved?
Abstract
CONTEXT: Previous research indicates physicians frequently choose a patient problem to explore before determining the patient's full spectrum of concerns. OBJECTIVE: To examine the extent to which experienced family physicians in various practice settings elicit the agenda of concerns patients bring to the office. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey using linguistic analysis of a convenience sample of 264 patient-physician interviews. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Primary care offices of 29 board-certified family physicians practicing in rural Washington (n = 1; 3%), semirural Colorado (n = 20; 69%), and urban settings in the United States and Canada (n = 8; 27%). Nine participants had fellowship training in communication skills and family counseling. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient-physician verbal interactions, including physician solicitations of patient concerns, rate of completion of patient responses, length of time for patient responses, and frequency of late-arising patient concerns. RESULTS: Physicians solicited patient concerns in 199 interviews (75.4%). Patients' initial statements of concerns were completed in 74 interviews (28.0%). Physicians redirected the patient's opening statement after a mean of 23.1 seconds. Patients allowed to complete their statement of concerns used only 6 seconds more on average than those who were redirected before completion of concerns. Late-arising concerns were more common when physicians did not solicit patient concerns during the interview (34.9% vs 14.9%). Fellowship-trained physicians were more likely to solicit patient concerns and allow patients to complete their initial statement of concerns (44% vs 22%). CONCLUSIONS: Physicians often redirect patients' initial descriptions of their concerns. Once redirected, the descriptions are rarely completed. Consequences of incomplete initial descriptions include late-arising concerns and missed opportunities to gather potentially important patient data. Soliciting the patient's agenda takes little time and can improve interview efficiency and yield increased data.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Time and the Patient–Physician Relationship
Dugdale, D. C., Epstein, R., & Pantilat, S. Z. (1999) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1046/j.1525-1497.1999.00263.x · Cited by 609
Self-citationKaplan, S. H., Gandek, B., Greenfield, S., Rogers, W., & Ware, J. E. (1995) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-199512000-00002 · Cited by 580
Smith, R. C., Lyles, J. S., Mettler, J., Stoffelmayr, B. E., Van Egeren, L. F., Marshall, A. A., Gardiner, J. C., Maduschke, K. M., Stanley, J. M., Osborn, G. G., et al. (1998) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-128-2-199801150-00008 · Cited by 228
Cited by
Epstein, R. M., Franks, P., Fiscella, K., Shields, C. G., Meldrum, S. C., Kravitz, R. L., & Duberstein, P. R. (2005) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.02.001 · Cited by 1,211
Self-citationIrving, G., Neves, A. L., Dambha-Miller, H., Oishi, A., Tagashira, H., Verho, A., & Holden, J. (2017) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017902 · Cited by 1,083
Shared decision making in clinical medicine: past research and future directions
Frosch, D. L., & Kaplan, R. M. (1999) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0749-3797(99)00097-5 · Cited by 721
Physician Gender and Patient-Centered Communication: A Critical Review of Empirical Research
Roter, D. L., & Hall, J. A. (2004) · Annual Review of Public Health · doi:10.1146/annurev.publhealth.25.101802.123134 · Cited by 616
Patient Participation in Medical Consultations: Why Some Patients are More Involved Than Others
Street, R. L., Gordon, H. S., Ward, M. M., Krupat, E., & Kravitz, R. L. (2005) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/01.mlr.0000178172.40344.70 · Cited by 573
Metadata
- Authors
- Marvel, M. K., Epstein, R. M., Flowers, K., & Beckman, H. B.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 1999-01-20
- Volume
- 281
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 283
- ISSN
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2165054688
- Cited by
- 736
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 40.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Soliciting the Patient's Agenda: Have We Improved? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.281.3.283
- The paper
- Marvel, M. K., Epstein, R. M., Flowers, K., & Beckman, H. B. (1999). Soliciting the Patient's Agenda: Have We Improved? JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.281.3.283
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.