Cited by 955Patient-Provider Communication in HealthcareCultural Competency in Health CareInterpreting and Communication in Healthcare

Patient Race/Ethnicity and Quality of Patient–Physician Communication During Medical Visits

Open access
Johnson, Rachel L., Roter, Debra, Powe, Neil R., Cooper, Lisa A.·2004·American Journal of Public Health

Abstract

Objectives. We examined the association between patient race/ethnicity and patient–physician communication during medical visits. Methods. We used audiotape and questionnaire data collected in 1998 and 2002 to determine whether the quality of medical-visit communication differs among African American versus White patients. We analyzed data from 458 African American and White patients who visited 61 physicians in the Baltimore, Md–Washington, DC–Northern Virginia metropolitan area. Outcome measures that assessed the communication process, patient-centeredness, and emotional tone (affect) of the medical visit were derived from audiotapes coded by independent raters. Results. Physicians were 23% more verbally dominant and engaged in 33% less patient-centered communication with African American patients than with White patients. Furthermore, both African American patients and their physicians exhibited lower levels of positive affect than White patients and their physicians did. Conclusions. Patient–physician communication during medical visits differs among African American versus White patients. Interventions that increase physicians’ patient-centeredness and awareness of affective cues with African Americans patients and that activate African American patients to participate in their health care are important strategies for addressing racial/ethnic disparities in health care.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2105/ajph.94.12.2084

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 39 · Cited by 955

Authors
Johnson, R. L., Roter, D., Powe, N. R., & Cooper, L. A.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
Venue
American Journal of Public Health
Published
2004-12
Volume
94
Issue
12
Pages
2084-2090
ISSN
  • 0090-0036 (ISSN-L)
  • 1541-0048
OpenAlex
W2073126534
Cited by
955
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 54 · 2022: 63 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 50 · 2019: 45 · 2018: 43 · 2017: 43 · 2016: 46 · 2015: 49 · 2014: 51 · 2013: 54 · 2012: 44
FWCI
52.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Public Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University Libraries (University of Maryland) (submittedVersion)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
  • Digital Repository at the University of Maryland (University of Maryland College Park)
Funders
  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (F31HS013265)
  • Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01-HL69403, R01HL069403)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (T32GM007309, 5T32 GM07309)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Cultural Competency in Health Care
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Interpreting and Communication in Healthcare
Keywords
patient-physician communication, race and ethnicity, African American patients, racial disparities in health care, patient-centered communication, positive affect, health care access
MeSH terms
Affect, Black or African American, Communication, Female, Humans, Male, Physician-Patient Relations, Primary Health Care, White People

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