The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Patient Participation in Medical Consultations: Why Some Patients are More Involved Than Others
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients vary in their willingness and ability to actively participate in medical consultations. Because more active patient participation contributes to improved health outcomes and quality of care, it is important to understand factors affecting the way patients communicate with healthcare providers. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to examine the extent to which patient participation in medical interactions is influenced by 1) the patient's personal characteristics (age, gender, education, ethnicity); 2) the physician's communication style (eg, use of partnership-building and supportive talk); and 3) the clinical setting (eg, the health condition, medical specialty). RESEARCH DESIGN AND SUBJECTS: The authors conducted a post hoc cross-sectional analysis of 279 physician-patient interactions from 3 clinical sites: 1) primary care patients in Sacramento, California, 2) patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) from the San Francisco Bay area, and 3) patients with lung cancer from a VA hospital in Texas. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome measures included the degree to which patients asked questions, were assertive, and expressed concerns and the degree to which physicians used partnership-building and supportive talk (praise, reassurance, empathy) in their consultations. RESULTS: The majority of active participation behaviors were patient-initiated (84%) rather than prompted by physician partnership-building or supportive talk. Patients who were more active participants received more facilitative communication from physicians, were more educated, and were more likely to be white than of another ethnicity. Women more willingly expressed negative feelings and concerns. There was considerable variability in patient participation across the 3 clinical settings. Female physicians were more likely to use supportive talk than males, and physicians generally used less supportive talk with nonwhite compared with white patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patient participation in medical encounters depends on a complex interplay of personal, physician, and contextual factors. Although more educated and white patients tended to be more active participants than their counterparts, the strongest predictors of patient participation were situation-specific, namely the clinical setting and the physician's communicative style. Physicians could more effectively facilitate patient involvement by more frequently using partnership-building and supportive communication. Future research should investigate how the nuances of individual clinical settings (eg, the health condition, time allotted for the visit) impose constraints or opportunities for more effective patient involvement in 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.
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
A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974) · Language · doi:10.2307/412243 · Cited by 11,350
Effective physician-patient communication and health outcomes: a review.
(1995) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 4,085
Race, Gender, and Partnership in the Patient-Physician Relationship
Cooper-Patrick, L. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.282.6.583 · Cited by 2,148
Assessing the Effects of Physician-Patient Interactions on the Outcomes of Chronic Disease
Kaplan, S. H., Greenfield, S., & Ware, J. E. (1989) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-198903001-00010 · Cited by 2,043
Physician Gender Effects in Medical Communication: A Meta-analytic Review
Roter, D. L., Hall, J. A., & Aoki, Y. (2002) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.288.6.756 · Cited by 1,427
Handbook of health communication
Thompson, T. L. (2008) · Cited by 1,120
Greenfield, S., Kaplan, S. H., Ware, J. E., Yano, E. M., & Frank, H. J. L. (1988) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/bf02595921 · Cited by 1,119
Using SAS PROC MIXED to Fit Multilevel Models, Hierarchical Models, and Individual Growth Models
Singer, J. D. (1998) · Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics · doi:10.2307/1165280 · Cited by 1,092
Patient Race/Ethnicity and Quality of Patient–Physician Communication During Medical Visits
Johnson, R. L., Roter, D., Powe, N. R., & Cooper, L. A. (2004) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.94.12.2084 · Cited by 955
The New Handbook of Language and Social Psychology
Giles, H., & Robinson, W. P. (2001) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 738
Cited by
Patient-centered care and adherence: definitions and applications to improve outcomes
Robinson, J. H., Callister, L. C., Berry, J. A., & Dearing, K. A. (2008) · Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners · doi:10.1111/j.1745-7599.2008.00360.x · Cited by 721
Street, R. L., O'Malley, K. J., Cooper, L. A., & Haidet, P. (2008) · The Annals of Family Medicine · doi:10.1370/afm.821 · Cited by 678
Self-citationSocio-economic status of the patient and doctor–patient communication: does it make a difference?
Willems, S., De Maesschalck, S., Deveugele, M., Derese, A., & De Maeseneer, J. (2005) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/j.pec.2004.02.011 · Cited by 582
The social gradient in doctor-patient communication
Verlinde, E., De Laender, N., De Maesschalck, S., Deveugele, M., & Willems, S. (2012) · International Journal for Equity in Health · doi:10.1186/1475-9276-11-12 · Cited by 307
A systematic review of the associations between empathy measures and patient outcomes in cancer care
Lelorain, S., Brédart, A., Dolbeault, S., & Sultan, S. (2012) · Psycho-Oncology · doi:10.1002/pon.2115 · Cited by 289
Metadata
- Authors
- Street, R. L., Gordon, H. S., Ward, M. M., Krupat, E., & Kravitz, R. L.
- Venue
- Medical Care
- Published
- 2005-10
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 960-969
- ISSN
- 0025-7079 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2020237972
- Cited by
- 573
- References
- 48
- FWCI
- 42.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Patient Participation in Medical Consultations: Why Some Patients are More Involved Than Others. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.mlr.0000178172.40344.70
- The paper
- Street, R. L., Gordon, H. S., Ward, M. M., Krupat, E., & Kravitz, R. L. (2005). Patient Participation in Medical Consultations: Why Some Patients are More Involved Than Others. Medical Care. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000178172.40344.70
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.