Cited by 45Patient-Provider Communication in HealthcareEmpathy and Medical EducationPatient Satisfaction in Healthcare

Quality of doctor-patient communication through the eyes of the patient: variation according to the patient's educational level

Open access
Aelbrecht, Karolien, Rimondini, Michela, Bensing, Jozien, Moretti, Francesca, Willems, Sara, Mazzi, Mariangela, Fletcher, Ian, Deveugele, Myriam·2015·Advances in Health Sciences Education

Abstract

Good doctor-patient communication may lead to better compliance, higher patient satisfaction, and finally, better health. Although the social variance in how physicians and patients communicate is clearly demonstrated, little is known about what patients with different educational attainments actually prefer in doctor-patient communication. In this study we describe patients' perspective in doctor-patient communication according to their educational level, and to what extent these perspectives lean towards the expert opinion on doctor-patient communication. In a multi-center study (Belgium, The Netherlands, UK and Italy), focus group discussions were organised using videotaped medical consultations. A mixed methods approach was used to analyse the data. Firstly, a difference in perspective in communication style was found between the lower educated participants versus the middle and higher educated participants. Secondly, lower educated participants referred positively most to aspects related to the affective/emotional area of the medical consultation, followed by the task-oriented/problem-focused area. Middle and higher educated participants positively referred most to the task-oriented/problem-focused area. The competency of the physician was an important category of communication for all participants, independent of social background. The results indicate that the preferences of lower educated participants lean more towards the expert opinion in doctor-patient communication than the middle and higher educated participants. Patients' educational level seems to influence their perspective on communication style and should be taken into account by physicians. Further quantitative research is needed to confirm these results.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10459-014-9569-6

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Moretti, F., Fletcher, I., Mazzi, M., Deveugele, M., Rimondini, M., Geurts, C., et al. (2012). GULiVER: travelling into the heart of good doctor-patient communication from a patient perspective. A multi- centre study. European Journal of Public Health, 22(4), 464-469.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Aelbrecht, K., Rimondini, M., Bensing, J., Moretti, F., Willems, S., Mazzi, M., Fletcher, I., & Deveugele, M.
Affiliations
  • Ghent University Hospital (BE)
  • University of Verona (IT)
  • Utrecht University (NL)
  • Lancaster University (GB)
Corresponding author
Aelbrecht, Karolien
Venue
Advances in Health Sciences Education
Published
2014-11-27
Volume
20
Issue
4
Pages
873-884
ISSN
  • 1382-4996 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-1677
OpenAlex
W2013552107
Cited by
45
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 1
FWCI
3.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Advances in Health Sciences Education (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Empathy and Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare
Keywords
physician-patient communication, patient preferences, communication styles, emotional communication, task-oriented communication, physician competence, class differences, patient satisfaction
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Communication, Educational Status, Europe, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Physician-Patient Relations, Surveys and Questionnaires, Video Recording, Focus Groups

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