Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 50

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Patients' Views of Family Involvement in Medical Care Decisions and Encounters

Prohaska, Thomas R., Glasser, Michael·1996·Research on Aging

Abstract

This study was designed to examine the role of the third person in the doctor-older patient-companion triad at three points in the medical care decision process of older patients: before the medical encounter, during the medical visit, and subsequent to the medical encounter. Older patients accompanied on the medical visit were compared with older patients who came alone regarding the roles and activities of family and others leading to the older patients' medical visit as well as immediate outcomes upon completion of the medical visit and short-term outcomes 2 months after the initial medical visit. Older patients accompanied to the medical visit also assessed roles and assistance provided by the third-person companion during the medical encounter. Older patients accompanied on the medical visit were usually accompanied by the same person across medical visits. The third person was likely to be a spouse and was viewed as an asset during and after the medical encounter. Older accompanied persons were more likely to have assistance both before and after the medical visit, although there were few differences between groups in terms of immediate and short-term outcomes. Findings suggest that the presence of the third person in the doctor-older patient medical encounter should be viewed as an opportunity for patient education and support for the companion who provides an ongoing role in care of the older patient.

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 · 10.1177/0164027596181004

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.

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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 18

  1. 10.1093/geront/27.6.729 · DOI
  2. 10.1207/s15327027hc0101_7 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Beisecker, A., 1994, "Older Patients and Their Doctors: Research Perspectives."
  4. 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1983.tb05124.x · DOI
  5. 10.1111/1467-9566.ep10949087 · DOI
  6. 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1984.tb06138.x · DOI
  7. 10.1001/jama.1993.03500100080032 · doi:10.1001/jama.1993.03500100080032
  8. Frankel, R., 1982, Explorations in Provider and Patient Interactions, 71
  9. 10.1097/00003727-199207000-00010 · doi:10.1097/00003727-199207000-00010
  10. 10.1016/0271-5309(86)90010-8 · DOI · Paper page
  11. 10.1016/0277-9536(94)90191-0 · DOI · Paper page
  12. 10.1093/geront/27.2.164 · DOI
  13. Haug, M., 1981, Elderly Patients and Their Doctors
  14. 10.1097/00003727-198811000-00006 · doi:10.1097/00003727-198811000-00006
  15. 10.1016/0277-9536(91)90073-L · DOI
  16. Prohaska, T., 1990, Behavior, Health and Aging, 1, 27
  17. Rosow, I., 1981, Elderly Patients and Their Doctors
  18. 10.1007/BF02599531 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 50

Metadata

Authors
Prohaska, T. R., & Glasser, M.
Venue
Research on Aging
Published
1996-03
Volume
18
Issue
1
Pages
52-69
ISSN
  • 0164-0275
  • 1552-7573
Cited by
50
References
0
Language
en
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)

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: Patients' Views of Family Involvement in Medical Care Decisions and Encounters. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0164027596181004
The paper
Prohaska, T. R., & Glasser, M. (1996). Patients' Views of Family Involvement in Medical Care Decisions and Encounters. Research on Aging. https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027596181004

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.