Cited by 153Patient-Provider Communication in HealthcareEmpathy and Medical EducationInnovations in Medical Education

Physician and patient communication training in primary care: effects on participation and satisfaction.

Haskard, Kelly B., Williams, Summer L., DiMatteo, M. Robin, Rosenthal, Robert, White, Maysel Kemp, Goldstein, Michael G.·2008·Health Psychology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of a communication skills training program for physicians and patients. DESIGN: A randomized experiment to improve physician communication skills was assessed 1 and 6 months after a training intervention; patient training to be active participants was assessed after 1 month. Across three primary medical care settings, 156 physicians treating 2,196 patients were randomly assigned to control group or one of three conditions (physician, patient, or both trained). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient satisfaction and perceptions of choice, decision-making, information, and lifestyle counseling; physicians' satisfaction and stress; and global ratings of the communication process. RESULTS: The following significant (p < .05) effects emerged: physician training improved patients' satisfaction with information and overall care; increased willingness to recommend the physician; increased physicians' counseling (as reported by patients) about weight loss, exercise, and quitting smoking and alcohol; increased physician satisfaction with physical exam detail; increased independent ratings of physicians' sensitive, connected communication with their patients, and decreased physician satisfaction with interpersonal aspects of professional life. Patient training improved physicians' satisfaction with data collection; if only physician or patient was trained, physician stress increased and physician satisfaction decreased. CONCLUSION: Implications for improving physician-patient relationship outcomes through communication skills training are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0278-6133.27.5.513

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Haskard, K. B., Williams, S. L., DiMatteo, M. R., Rosenthal, R., White, M. K., & Goldstein, M. G.
Affiliations
University of California, Riverside (US)
Venue
Health Psychology
Published
2008
Volume
27
Issue
5
Pages
513-522
ISSN
  • 0278-6133 (ISSN-L)
  • 1930-7810
OpenAlex
W2014038791
Cited by
153
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 9
FWCI
15.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Health Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
  • UC Riverside Academic Senate
  • Bayer Pharmaceutical Corporation
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 › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
Keywords
physician-patient communication, communication skills training, patient participation, patient satisfaction, physician satisfaction, physician stress, shared decision-making, lifestyle counseling, primary care, physician-patient relationship, patient training
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Communication, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Participation, Personal Satisfaction, Physician-Patient Relations, Primary Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires

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