The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Role of Patient Participation in the Doctor Visit: Implications for adherence to diabetes care
Abstract
For patients, treatment of diabetes involves complex changes in basic behaviors and adherence to complicated regimens. Understanding the factors that enable patients to adhere to diabetes treatment is the first step to designing effective interventions. Researchers of diabetes care have postulated that increasing diabetic patients' participation in medical decision making during the doctor visit is likely to improve their adherence to self-care. However, a critical review of the impact of patient participation on diabetic patients adherence to self-care is absent from the literature. We review the subject of patient participation in medical decision making and its effect on adherence to self-care for patients with diabetes. We introduce a model of the determinants of adherence to diabetes self-care that incorporates the effects of patient participation in medical decision making. In this model, we suggest three ways that patient participation can affect adherence to self-care: 1) it may have a direct effect; 2) it may affect adherence to self-care indirectly by affecting patients' understanding of their treatment regimen or the fit of their regimen with their lifestyle; and 3) perceived omissions of participation can affect adherence to self-care indirectly through an effect on patient satisfaction. Research is needed to identify more clearly which components of patient participation affect adherence to self-care and in what ways. Distinguishing patient and physician behaviors that contribute to the process of patient participation would provide a means to develop specific behavioral interventions.
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
Meta-analysis of correlates of provider behavior in medical encounters
Hall, J. A., Roter, D. L., & Katz, N. R. (1988) · Medical Care · doi:10.1097/00005650-198807000-00002 · Cited by 1,069 · cited 1×
“Increased information giving, meeting of expectations, and expression of empathy affect patients' satisfaction with their medical care more than do costs of care or technical competence of the physician (81-83).”
Background
Cited by
Osterberg, L., & Blaschke, T. (2005) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmra050100 · Cited by 7,974
Patient Medication Adherence: Measures in Daily Practice
Jimmy, B., & Jose, J. (2011) · Oman Medical Journal · doi:10.5001/omj.2011.38 · Cited by 956
We need minimally disruptive medicine
May, C., Montori, V. M., & Mair, F. S. (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2803 · Cited by 734
Heisler, M., Bouknight, R. R., Hayward, R. A., Smith, D. M., & Kerr, E. A. (2002) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1046/j.1525-1497.2002.10905.x · Cited by 717
Interacting with cancer patients: the significance of physicians' communication behavior
Arora, N. K. (2003) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0277-9536(02)00449-5 · Cited by 661
Metadata
- Authors
- Golin, C. E., DiMatteo, M. R., & Gelberg, L.
- Venue
- Diabetes Care
- Publisher
- American Diabetes Association
- Published
- 1996-10-01
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1153-1164
- ISSN
- 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
- 1935-5548
- OpenAlex
- W2015987918
- Cited by
- 243
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 2.53
- 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: The Role of Patient Participation in the Doctor Visit: Implications for adherence to diabetes care. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2337/diacare.19.10.1153
- The paper
- Golin, C. E., DiMatteo, M. R., & Gelberg, L. (1996). The Role of Patient Participation in the Doctor Visit: Implications for adherence to diabetes care. Diabetes Care. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.19.10.1153
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.