The Associations of Clinicians’ Implicit Attitudes About Race With Medical Visit Communication and Patient Ratings of Interpersonal Care
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVES: We examined the associations of clinicians' implicit attitudes about race with visit communication and patient ratings of care. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study of 40 primary care clinicians and 269 patients in urban community-based practices, we measured clinicians' implicit general race bias and race and compliance stereotyping with 2 implicit association tests and related them to audiotape measures of visit communication and patient ratings. RESULTS: Among Black patients, general race bias was associated with more clinician verbal dominance, lower patient positive affect, and poorer ratings of interpersonal care; race and compliance stereotyping was associated with longer visits, slower speech, less patient centeredness, and poorer ratings of interpersonal care. Among White patients, bias was associated with more verbal dominance and better ratings of interpersonal care; race and compliance stereotyping was associated with less verbal dominance, shorter visits, faster speech, more patient centeredness, higher clinician positive affect, and lower ratings of some aspects of interpersonal care. CONCLUSIONS: Clinician implicit race bias and race and compliance stereotyping are associated with markers of poor visit communication and poor ratings of care, particularly among Black patients.
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
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 one study, the negative rating of interaction was also given by external observers.
“and, in one study, also negatively rated by external observers [23].”
From Implicit bias in healthcare professionals: a systematic review (2017) · cites this paper as [23]
The only three studies conducted in naturalistic settings combined the IAT with measures of physician-patient interaction.
“The only three studies conducted in naturalistic settings combined the IAT with measures of physician-patient interaction [22–24].”
From Implicit bias in healthcare professionals: a systematic review (2017) · cites this paper as [23]
Three studies found a significant correlation between high levels of physicians' implicit bias against blacks on IAT scores and interaction that was negatively rated by black patients.
“Three studies found a significant correlation between high levels of physicians’ implicit bias against blacks on IAT scores and interaction that was negatively rated by black patients [23, 24, 44]”
From Implicit bias in healthcare professionals: a systematic review (2017) · cites this paper as [23]
The review shows clearer evidence for a relationship between implicit bias and negative effects on clinical interaction.
“As our review shows, there is clearer evidence for a relationship between implicit bias and negative effects on clinical interaction [23, 24, 44].”
From Implicit bias in healthcare professionals: a systematic review (2017) · cites this paper as [23]
In some studies, the attitudes of patients towards healthcare professionals were recorded and used to evaluate clinical interaction.
“In some studies, the attitudes of patients towards healthcare professionals were recorded and used to evaluate clinical interaction [23, 24, 44].”
From Implicit bias in healthcare professionals: a systematic review (2017) · cites this paper as [23]
Exposure to communication skills training was not associated with lower race-IAT scores for physicians.
“Exposure to communication skills training was not associated with lower race-IAT scores for physicians [23].”
From Implicit bias in healthcare professionals: a systematic review (2017) · cites this paper as [23]
More implicit bias was associated with less patient-centered dialogue, lower patient positive affect, lower perception of respect from the clinician, less patient liking of the clinician and lower trust and confidence in clinician.
“For example, more implicit bias was associated with less patient-centered dialogue, lower patient positive affect, lower perception of respect from the clinician, less patient liking of the clinician and lower trust and confidence in clinician”
From Reducing Racial Inequities in Health: Using What We Already Know to Take Action (2019) · cites this paper as [74]
Provider implicit bias was associated with poorer quality of patient provider communication and lower patient evaluation of the quality of the medical encounter including provider nonverbal behavior.
“Another study of providers who work in safety net clinics in a major metropolitan area found that provider implicit bias was associated with poorer quality of patient provider communication and lower patient evaluation of the quality of the medical encounter including provider nonverbal behavior [74].”
From Reducing Racial Inequities in Health: Using What We Already Know to Take Action (2019) · cites this paper as [74]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 76 · Cited by 815
- Authors
- Cooper, L. A., Roter, D. L., Carson, K. A., Beach, M. C., Sabin, J. A., Greenwald, A. G., & Inui, T. S.
- Affiliations
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- ORCID
- Venue
- American Journal of Public Health
- Publisher
- American Public Health Association
- Published
- 2012-05
- Volume
- 102
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 979-987
- ISSN
- 0090-0036 (ISSN-L)
- 1541-0048
- PMC
- PMC3483913
- OpenAlex
- W2117737167
- Cited by
- 815
- References
- 76
- Citations by year
- 2026: 33 · 2025: 59 · 2024: 64 · 2023: 56 · 2022: 86 · 2021: 103 · 2020: 82 · 2019: 74 · 2018: 63 · 2017: 48 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 50 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 64.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- American Journal of Public Health (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Johns Hopkins University
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R01HS013645)
- National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01-HL69403, R01HL069403, K24HL083113)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Keywords
- interpersonal care, primary care providers, Black patients, verbal dominance, patient-centeredness, Implicit Association Test
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Attitude of Health Personnel, Black or African American, Communication, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Health Services Research, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prejudice, Professional-Patient Relations, Socioeconomic Factors, Stereotyping, Urban Population, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Patient Satisfaction, Racial Groups
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