The DOI matches its Crossref record; 76 of the 76 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Measuring patient-centered communication in cancer care: A literature review and the development of a systematic approach
Open accessAbstract
Patient-centered communication (PCC) is a critical element of patient-centered care, which the Institute of Medicine (Committee on Quality of Health Care in America, 2001) promulgates as essential to improving healthcare delivery. Consequently, the US National Cancer Institute's Strategic Plan for Leading the Nation (2006) calls for assessing the delivery of PCC in cancer care. However, no comprehensive measure of PCC exists, and stakeholders continue to embrace different conceptualizations and assumptions about how to measure it. Our approach was grounded in the PCC conceptual framework presented in a recent US National Cancer Institute monograph (Epstein & Street, 2007). In this study, we developed a comprehensive inventory of domains and subdomains for PCC by reviewing relevant literature and theories, interviewing a limited number of cancer patients, and consulting experts. The resulting measurement domains are organized under the six core functions specified in the PCC conceptual framework: exchanging information, fostering healing relationships, recognizing and responding to emotions, managing uncertainty, making decisions, and enabling patient self-management. These domains represent a promising platform for operationalizing the complicated PCC construct. Although this study focused specifically on cancer care, the PCC measurements are relevant to other clinical contexts and illnesses, given that patient-centered care is a goal across all healthcare. Finally, we discuss considerations for developing PCC measures for research, quality assessment, and surveillance purposes. United States Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute (2006). The NCI Strategic Plan for Leading the Nation: To Eliminate the Suffering and Death Due to Cancer. NIH Publication No. 06-5773.
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
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68 · Cited by 54,599
Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century
Baker, A. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.323.7322.1192 · Cited by 10,736
Charles, C., Gafni, A., & Whelan, T. (1999) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0277-9536(99)00145-8 · Cited by 2,333
The construction of preference.
Slovic, P. (1995) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.50.5.364 · Cited by 2,009
Recent developments in modeling preferences: Uncertainty and ambiguity
Camerer, C., & Weber, M. (1992) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1007/bf00122575 · Cited by 1,795
Interaction Process Analysis: A Method for the Study of Small Groups.
Greenwood, E., & Bales, R. F. (1950) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2086941 · Cited by 1,673
Krasner, M. S. (2009) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2009.1384 · Cited by 1,650
Epstein, R. M., & Street, R. L. (2007) · PsycEXTRA Dataset · doi:10.1037/e481972008-001 · Cited by 1,590
Self-citationTrust in Physicians and Medical Institutions: What Is It, Can It Be Measured, and Does It Matter?
Hall, M. A., Dugan, E., Zheng, B., & Mishra, A. K. (2001) · The Milbank Quarterly · doi:10.1111/1468-0009.00223 · Cited by 1,484
Patient-Centered Medicine: Transforming the Clinical Method
Stewart, M., Brown, J. B., Weston, W. W., McWhinney, I. R., McWilliam, C. L., & Freeman, T. R. (1995) · Cited by 1,299
Cited by
Towards a standardised definition for fundamental care: A modified Delphi study
Feo, R., Conroy, T., Jangland, E., Muntlin Athlin, Å., Brovall, M., Parr, J., Blomberg, K., & Kitson, A. (2018) · Journal of Clinical Nursing · doi:10.1111/jocn.14247 · Cited by 265
Patient-Centered Decision Making and Health Care Outcomes: An Observational Study
Weiner, S. J., Schwartz, A., Sharma, G., Binns-Calvey, A., Ashley, N., Kelly, B., Dayal, A., Patel, S., Weaver, F. M., & Harris, I. (2013) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-158-8-201304160-00001 · Cited by 212
Hong, H., & Oh, H. J. (2020) · Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10410236.2019.1570427 · Cited by 171
Complementary treatment comparison for chronic pain management: a randomized longitudinal study
Bicego, A., Monseur, J., Collinet, A., Donneau, A.-F., Fontaine, R., Libbrecht, D., Malaise, N., Nyssen, A.-S., Raaf, M., Rousseaux, F., et al. (2021) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0256001 · Cited by 49
Screening for Cancer: Considerations for Low- and Middle-Income Countries
Sullivan, T., Sullivan, R., & Ginsburg, O. M. (2015) · Disease Control Priorities, Third Edition (Volume 3): Cancer · doi:10.1596/978-1-4648-0349-9_ch12 · Cited by 38
Metadata
- Authors
- McCormack, L. A., Treiman, K., Rupert, D., Williams-Piehota, P., Nadler, E., Arora, N. K., Lawrence, W., & Street, R. L.
- Venue
- Social Science & Medicine
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2011-04
- Volume
- 72
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1085-1095
- ISSN
- 0277-9536 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2023378683
- Cited by
- 364
- References
- 76
- FWCI
- 31.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Measuring patient-centered communication in cancer care: A literature review and the development of a systematic approach. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.01.020
- The paper
- McCormack, L. A., Treiman, K., Rupert, D., Williams-Piehota, P., Nadler, E., Arora, N. K., Lawrence, W., & Street, R. L. (2011). Measuring patient-centered communication in cancer care: A literature review and the development of a systematic approach. Social Science & Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.01.020
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.