CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 119Patient-Provider Communication in HealthcareArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Using artificial intelligence to analyse and teach communication in healthcare

Open access
Butow, Phyllis, Hoque, Ehsan·2020·The Breast
DOI 10.1016/j.breast.2020.01.008PMC PMC7375542
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Communication is a core component of effective healthcare that impacts many patient and doctor outcomes, yet is complex and challenging to both analyse and teach. Human-based coding and audit systems are time-intensive and costly; thus, there is considerable interest in the application of artificial intelligence to this topic, through machine learning using both supervised and unsupervised learning algorithms. In this article we introduce health communication, its importance for patient and health professional outcomes, and the need for rigorous empirical data to support this field. We then discuss historical interaction coding systems and recent developments in applying artificial intelligence (AI) to automate such coding in the health setting. Finally, we discuss available evidence for the reliability and validity of AI coding, application of AI in training and audit of communication, as well as limitations and future directions in this field. In summary, recent advances in machine learning have allowed accurate textual transcription, and analysis of prosody, pauses, energy, intonation, emotion and communication style. Studies have established moderate to good reliability of machine learning algorithms, comparable with human coding (or better), and have identified some expected and unexpected associations between communication variables and patient satisfaction. Finally, application of artificial intelligence to communication skills training has been attempted, to provide audit and feedback, and through the use of avatars. This looks promising to provide confidential and easily accessible training, but may be best used as an adjunct to human-based training.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.breast.2020.01.008

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 49 references

3 of the 49 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–119 of 119

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Butow, P., & Hoque, E.
Affiliations
The University of Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Butow, Phyllis
ORCID
Butow, Phyllis
Venue
The Breast
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-04
Volume
50
Pages
49-55
ISSN
0960-9776 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.breast.2020.01.008
PMC
PMC7375542
OpenAlex
W2999911199
Cited by
118
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 6
FWCI
13.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • The Breast (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Keywords
health communication, physician-patient communication, artificial intelligence, machine learning, communication skills training, audit and feedback, avatars, patient satisfaction, textual transcription
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Artificial Intelligence, Humans, Reproducibility of Results, Health Communication, Health Information Systems

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