The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Patient-Centered Decision Making and Health Care Outcomes: An Observational Study
Abstract
Background Patient-centered decision making (PCDM) is the process of identifying clinically relevant, patient-specific circumstances and behaviors to formulate a contextually appropriate care plan. Objective To ascertain whether encounters in which PCDM occurs are followed by improved health care outcomes compared with encounters where there is inattention to patient context. Design Patients surreptitiously audio-recorded encounters with their physicians. Medical records of these encounters were then screened for "contextual red flags," such as deteriorating self-management of a chronic condition, that could reflect such underlying contextual factors as competing responsibilities or loss of social support. When a contextual factor was identified, either as a result of physician questioning or because a patient volunteered information, physicians were scored on the basis of whether they adapted the care plan to it. Setting Internal medicine clinics at 2 Veterans Affairs facilities. Participants 774 patients audio-recorded encounters with 139 resident physicians. Measurements Individualized outcome measures were based on the contextual red flag, such as improved blood pressure control in a patient presenting with hypertension and loss of medication coverage. Outcome coders were blinded to physician performance. Results Among 548 contextual red flags, 208 contextual factors were confirmed, either when physicians probed or patients volunteered information. Physician attention to…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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 the citing paper
“Although not all patient presentations contain contextual factors, approximately 40% to 50% do.6”
From Effect of Electronic Health Record Clinical Decision Support on Contextualization of Care (2022) · cites this paper as [6]
In the citing paper
“Clinicians address them 60% to 70% of the time, leaving substantial room for improvement.6,7”
From Effect of Electronic Health Record Clinical Decision Support on Contextualization of Care (2022) · cites this paper as [6]
In the citing paper
“Loss of control of a chronic condition, missed appointments, and frequent emergency department visits are all examples of contextual red flags that improve when their underlying contextual factors are addressed.6”
From Effect of Electronic Health Record Clinical Decision Support on Contextualization of Care (2022) · cites this paper as [6]
In the citing paper
“Based on the number of contextual red flags and factors we expected, we determined that to obtain 80% power to detect an absolute increase in contextualization rates when factors were present from 50% to 75%, we would need recordings from 192 intervention and 288 control patients (which also provides at least 80% power to detect the expected increase in probing).”
From Effect of Electronic Health Record Clinical Decision Support on Contextualization of Care (2022) · cites this paper as [6]
Citations
Cites
Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't
Sackett, D. L., Rosenberg, W. M. C., Gray, J. A. M., Haynes, R. B., & Richardson, W. S. (1996) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71 · Cited by 15,769
Communication Patterns of Primary Care Physicians
Roter, D. L. (1997) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.1997.03540280088045 · Cited by 939 · cited 6×
“Studies of PCC that attempted to show an association with outcomes have been disappointing (10–12).”
MethodInfluentialContextual Errors and Failures in Individualizing Patient Care
Weiner, S. J., Schwartz, A., Weaver, F., Goldberg, J., Yudkowsky, R., Sharma, G., Binns-Calvey, A., Preyss, B., M. Schapira, M., Persell, S. D., et al. (2010) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-153-2-201007200-00002 · Cited by 214
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30261.x · DOI
- Weiner SJ, 2004, ACP J Club, 141, A11, 10.7326/ACPJC-2004-141-3-A11 · DOI
- 10.1136/bmjqs-2012-000832 · DOI
- 10.1001/jama.2010.1297 · DOI
- 10.1177/0272989X07306113 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0738-3991(99)00092-0 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11606-010-1496-5 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.01.020 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0738-3991(02)00012-5 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11606-012-2221-3 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Darkins, A. (2014) · Telemedicine and e-Health · doi:10.1089/tmj.2014.0143 · Cited by 97
Cook, D. A., Overgaard, J., Pankratz, V. S., Del Fiol, G., & Aakre, C. A. (2025) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/68486 · Cited by 96
Weiner, S., Schwartz, A., Altman, L., Ball, S., Bartle, B., Binns-Calvey, A., Chan, C., Falck-Ytter, C., Frenchman, M., Gee, B., et al. (2020) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.9644 · Cited by 60
Self-citationPatient-collected audio for performance assessment of the clinical encounter
Weiner, S. J., Schwartz, A., Sharma, G., Binns-Calvey, A., Ashley, N., Kelly, B., & Weaver, F. M. (2015) · The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety · doi:10.1016/s1553-7250(15)41037-2 · Cited by 27
Self-citationEffect of Electronic Health Record Clinical Decision Support on Contextualization of Care
Weiner, S. J., Schwartz, A., Weaver, F., Galanter, W., Olender, S., Kochendorfer, K., Binns-Calvey, A., Saini, R., Iqbal, S., Diaz, M., et al. (2022) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.38231 · Cited by 26
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Weiner, S. J., Schwartz, A., Sharma, G., Binns-Calvey, A., Ashley, N., Kelly, B., Dayal, A., Patel, S., Weaver, F. M., & Harris, I.
- Affiliations
- Edward Hines, Jr. VA Hospital (US)
- From Jesse Brown Veterans Affairs Medical Center and University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois; Edward Hines Jr. Veterans Affairs Hospital, Hines, Illinois; and Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
- Venue
- Annals of Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- American College of Physicians
- Published
- 2013-04-16
- Volume
- 158
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 573-579
- ISSN
- 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-3704
- OpenAlex
- W2067627650
- Cited by
- 212
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 11
- FWCI
- 38.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Annals of Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Annals of Internal Medicine
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Primary Care and Health Outcomes
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare
- Keywords
- patient-centered decision-making, physician-patient encounters, chronic disease self-management, prescription drug coverage, blood pressure control, medical residents, veterans, health care outcomes
- MeSH terms
- Decision Making, Humans, Internal Medicine, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Care Planning, Patient Compliance, Patient Participation, Patients, Primary Health Care, Social Support, Health Behavior, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Patient-Centered Care
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-Centered Decision Making and Health Care Outcomes: An Observational Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.7326/0003-4819-158-8-201304160-00001
- The paper
- Weiner, S. J., Schwartz, A., Sharma, G., Binns-Calvey, A., Ashley, N., Kelly, B., Dayal, A., Patel, S., Weaver, F. M., & Harris, I. (2013). Patient-Centered Decision Making and Health Care Outcomes: An Observational Study. Annals of Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-158-8-201304160-00001