医患沟通与患者和医生的调整结果之间的关联:系统回顾与相关性元分析》。

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 COMMUNICATION
Health Communication Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-02 DOI:10.1080/10410236.2023.2243043
Ana C Alves-Nogueira, Ana Carolina Góis, Marco Pereira, Maria Cristina Canavarro, Cláudia Melo, Carlos Carona
{"title":"医患沟通与患者和医生的调整结果之间的关联:系统回顾与相关性元分析》。","authors":"Ana C Alves-Nogueira, Ana Carolina Góis, Marco Pereira, Maria Cristina Canavarro, Cláudia Melo, Carlos Carona","doi":"10.1080/10410236.2023.2243043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Physician-Patient communication (PPC) has been linked to patient adjustment outcomes. However, conflicting results have been reported and previous systematic reviews showed some methodological weaknesses. It has also been suggested that PPC is related to physicians' own adjustment outcomes. This systematic review aims to explore and synthesize the associations between PPC and both patient and physician adjustment outcomes. A systematic search was conducted primarily in five databases and 11.488 non-duplicated articles were identified. Forty-five studies met the eligibility criteria and data extraction was performed for sample characteristics, PPC measurement, adjustment outcomes under examination and main outcomes. The observed results showed that the majority of the included studies were cross-sectional, assessed PPC by proxy-report and reported an overall positive association with patients' adjustment outcomes. None of the studies examined the association between PPC and physicians' adjustment outcomes. Thirty-three studies were meta-analyzed and showed a positive and significant association between PPC and patients' adjustment outcomes (<i>r</i> = .16). Due to the small number of studies included in the meta-analysis, the heterogeneity was high. Subgroup analysis could not identify sources for heterogeneity. Research on the associations between PPC and physicians' own adjustment outcomes is warranted. Future studies should be rigorous in defining clear PPC definitions, directionality of communication processes, and study design.</p>","PeriodicalId":12889,"journal":{"name":"Health Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Associations Between Physician-Patient Communication and Adjustment Outcomes of Patients and Physicians: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Correlations.\",\"authors\":\"Ana C Alves-Nogueira, Ana Carolina Góis, Marco Pereira, Maria Cristina Canavarro, Cláudia Melo, Carlos Carona\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10410236.2023.2243043\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Physician-Patient communication (PPC) has been linked to patient adjustment outcomes. However, conflicting results have been reported and previous systematic reviews showed some methodological weaknesses. It has also been suggested that PPC is related to physicians' own adjustment outcomes. This systematic review aims to explore and synthesize the associations between PPC and both patient and physician adjustment outcomes. A systematic search was conducted primarily in five databases and 11.488 non-duplicated articles were identified. Forty-five studies met the eligibility criteria and data extraction was performed for sample characteristics, PPC measurement, adjustment outcomes under examination and main outcomes. The observed results showed that the majority of the included studies were cross-sectional, assessed PPC by proxy-report and reported an overall positive association with patients' adjustment outcomes. None of the studies examined the association between PPC and physicians' adjustment outcomes. Thirty-three studies were meta-analyzed and showed a positive and significant association between PPC and patients' adjustment outcomes (<i>r</i> = .16). Due to the small number of studies included in the meta-analysis, the heterogeneity was high. Subgroup analysis could not identify sources for heterogeneity. Research on the associations between PPC and physicians' own adjustment outcomes is warranted. Future studies should be rigorous in defining clear PPC definitions, directionality of communication processes, and study design.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12889,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Communication\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2023.2243043\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Communication","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2023.2243043","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

医患沟通(PPC)与患者适应结果有关。然而,有报道称结果相互矛盾,之前的系统性回顾也显示出一些方法上的缺陷。也有人认为医患沟通与医生自身的适应结果有关。本系统性综述旨在探索和综合 PPC 与患者和医生适应结果之间的关系。我们主要在五个数据库中进行了系统性检索,发现了 11,488 篇不重复的文章。有 45 项研究符合资格标准,并对样本特征、PPC 测量、研究中的调整结果和主要结果进行了数据提取。观察结果表明,所纳入的大多数研究都是横断面研究,通过代理报告来评估 PPC,并报告了 PPC 与患者适应结果的总体正相关性。没有一项研究探讨了 PPC 与医生适应结果之间的关系。对 33 项研究进行了元分析,结果显示 PPC 与患者的适应结果之间存在显著的正相关关系(r = .16)。由于纳入荟萃分析的研究较少,异质性较高。分组分析无法确定异质性的来源。有必要对 PPC 与医生自身调整结果之间的关联进行研究。未来的研究应严格界定明确的 PPC 定义、沟通过程的方向性和研究设计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Associations Between Physician-Patient Communication and Adjustment Outcomes of Patients and Physicians: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Correlations.

Physician-Patient communication (PPC) has been linked to patient adjustment outcomes. However, conflicting results have been reported and previous systematic reviews showed some methodological weaknesses. It has also been suggested that PPC is related to physicians' own adjustment outcomes. This systematic review aims to explore and synthesize the associations between PPC and both patient and physician adjustment outcomes. A systematic search was conducted primarily in five databases and 11.488 non-duplicated articles were identified. Forty-five studies met the eligibility criteria and data extraction was performed for sample characteristics, PPC measurement, adjustment outcomes under examination and main outcomes. The observed results showed that the majority of the included studies were cross-sectional, assessed PPC by proxy-report and reported an overall positive association with patients' adjustment outcomes. None of the studies examined the association between PPC and physicians' adjustment outcomes. Thirty-three studies were meta-analyzed and showed a positive and significant association between PPC and patients' adjustment outcomes (r = .16). Due to the small number of studies included in the meta-analysis, the heterogeneity was high. Subgroup analysis could not identify sources for heterogeneity. Research on the associations between PPC and physicians' own adjustment outcomes is warranted. Future studies should be rigorous in defining clear PPC definitions, directionality of communication processes, and study design.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
10.30%
发文量
184
期刊介绍: As an outlet for scholarly intercourse between medical and social sciences, this noteworthy journal seeks to improve practical communication between caregivers and patients and between institutions and the public. Outstanding editorial board members and contributors from both medical and social science arenas collaborate to meet the challenges inherent in this goal. Although most inclusions are data-based, the journal also publishes pedagogical, methodological, theoretical, and applied articles using both quantitative or qualitative methods.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信