The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Family presence in routine medical visits: A meta-analytical review
Open accessAbstract
Older adults are commonly accompanied to routine physician visits, primarily by adult children and spouses. This is the first review of studies investigating the dynamics and consequences of patient accompaniment. Two types of evidence were examined: (1) observational studies of audio and/or videotaped medical visits, and (2) surveys of patients, families, or health care providers that ascertained experiences, expectations, and preferences for family companion presence and behaviors in routine medical visits. Meta-analytic techniques were used to summarize the evidence describing attributes of unaccompanied and accompanied patients and their companions, medical visit processes, and patient outcomes. The weighted mean rate of patient accompaniment to routine adult medical visits was 37.6% in 13 contributing studies. Accompanied patients were significantly older and more likely to be female, less educated, and in worse physical and mental health than unaccompanied patients. Companions were on average 63 years of age, predominantly female (79.4%), and spouses (54.7%) or adult children (32.2%) of patients. Accompanied patient visits were significantly longer, but verbal contribution to medical dialogue was comparable when accompanied patients and their family companion were compared with unaccompanied patients. When a companion was present, health care providers engaged in more biomedical information giving. Given the diversity of outcomes, pooled estimates could not be calculated: of 5 contributing studies 0 were unfavorable, 3 inconclusive, and 2 favorable for accompanied relative to unaccompanied patients. Study findings suggest potential practical benefits from more systematic recognition and integration of companions in health care delivery processes. We propose a conceptual framework to relate family companion presence and behaviors during physician visits to the quality of interpersonal health care processes, patient self management and health care.
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.
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?
In the citing paper
“MVCs may have a negative impact if they serve to decrease patient responsiveness to questioning or prevent topics from being raised by the patient [11, 12].”
From Non-spouse companions accompanying older adults to medical visits: a qualitative analysis (2019) · cites this paper as [12]
In the citing paper
“Few studies have examined the very significant role played by MVCs before and after a healthcare visit [12] with most literature focusing purely on their contributions during the healthcare encounter [3, 7–10, 14, 21, 31].”
From Non-spouse companions accompanying older adults to medical visits: a qualitative analysis (2019) · cites this paper as [12]
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
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions
Stacey, D., Légaré, F., Lewis, K., Barry, M. J., Bennett, C. L., Eden, K. B., Holmes-Rovner, M., Llewellyn-Thomas, H., Lyddiatt, A., Thomson, R., et al. (2017) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd001431.pub5 · Cited by 6,685
Social support and patient adherence to medical treatment: a meta-analysis.
DiMatteo, M. R. (2004) · Health Psychology · doi:10.1037/0278-6133.23.2.207 · Cited by 2,107 · cited 5×
“6 times more adherent than individuals without such support (DiMatteo, 2004).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialMeta-Analysis: Recent Developments in Quantitative Methods for Literature Reviews
Rosenthal, R., & DiMatteo, M. R. (2001) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.59 · Cited by 1,780
Meta-analysis of correlates of provider behavior in medical encounters
Hall, J. A., Roter, D. L., & Katz, N. R. (1988) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-198807000-00002 · Cited by 1,069
Self-citationCommunication Patterns of Primary Care Physicians
Roter, D. L. (1997) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.1997.03540280088045 · Cited by 939 · cited 2×
“…physicians employ more paternalistic, biomedical communication with the types of patients who tend to be accompanied— older, sicker, and socially disadvantaged patients (Fiscella & Epstein, 2008; Hall, Epstein, DeCiantis, & McNeil, 1993; Hall, Horgan, Stein, & Roter, 2002; Roter et al., 1997).”
BackgroundSelf-citationHealth Promoting Effects of Friends and Family on Health Outcomes in Older Adults
Seeman, T. E. (2000) · American Journal of Health Promotion · doi:10.4278/0890-1171-14.6.362 · Cited by 634
Mortality after the Hospitalization of a Spouse
Christakis, N. A., & Allison, P. D. (2006) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa050196 · Cited by 501
Vickrey, B. G., Mittman, B. S., Connor, K. I., Pearson, M. L., Della Penna, R. D., Ganiats, T. G., DeMonte, R. W., Chodosh, J., Cui, X., Vassar, S., et al. (2006) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-145-10-200611210-00004 · Cited by 44
Cited by
Wolff, J. L., Guan, Y., Boyd, C. M., Vick, J., Amjad, H., Roth, D. L., Gitlin, L. N., & Roter, D. L. (2017) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/j.pec.2016.10.022 · Cited by 65
Self-citationWolff, J. L., & Roter, D. L. (2012) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-011-1957-5 · Cited by 53
Self-citationNon-spouse companions accompanying older adults to medical visits: a qualitative analysis
Sheehan, O. C., Graham-Phillips, A. L., Wilson, J. D., Crews, D. C., Holt, C. L., Gabbard, J., Smith, K. C., Wolff, J. L., & Roth, D. L. (2019) · BMC Geriatrics · doi:10.1186/s12877-019-1098-y · Cited by 26
Self-citationEquity and AI Governance at Academic Medical Centers
(2024) · The American Journal of Managed Care · doi:10.37765/ajmc.2024.89555 · Cited by 8
Patel, S., Nikkhah, S., Nadkarni, S., Suryawanshi, P., Sureddi, R., Bhoyar, M., Kulkarni, P., Jogadia, D. D., Shimala, S., Harishchandrakar, A. V., et al. (2024) · Companion Publication of the 2024 Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing · doi:10.1145/3678884.3681901 · Cited by 4
Metadata
- Authors
- Wolff, J. L., & Roter, D. L.
- Venue
- Social Science & Medicine
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2011-03
- Volume
- 72
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 823-831
- ISSN
- 0277-9536 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2063389133
- Cited by
- 309
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 27.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Family presence in routine medical visits: A meta-analytical review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.01.015
- The paper
- Wolff, J. L., & Roter, D. L. (2011). Family presence in routine medical visits: A meta-analytical review. Social Science & Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.01.015
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.