↓ Skip to main content

Studying medical communication with video vignettes: a randomized study on how variations in video-vignette introduction format and camera focus influence analogue patients’ engagement

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Studying medical communication with video vignettes: a randomized study on how variations in video-vignette introduction format and camera focus influence analogue patients’ engagement
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12874-018-0472-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leonie N. C. Visser, Nadine Bol, Marij A. Hillen, Mathilde G. E. Verdam, Hanneke C. J. M. de Haes, Julia C. M. van Weert, Ellen M. A. Smets

Abstract

Video vignettes are used to test the effects of physicians' communication on patient outcomes. Methodological choices in video-vignette development may have far-stretching consequences for participants' engagement with the video, and thus the ecological validity of this design. To supplement the scant evidence in this field, this study tested how variations in video-vignette introduction format and camera focus influence participants' engagement with a video vignette showing a bad news consultation. Introduction format (A = audiovisual vs. B = written) and camera focus (1 = the physician only, 2 = the physician and the patient at neutral moments alternately, 3 = the physician and the patient at emotional moments alternately) were varied in a randomized 2 × 3 between-subjects design. One hundred eighty-one students were randomly assigned to watch one of the six resulting video-vignette conditions as so-called analogue patients, i.e., they were instructed to imagine themselves being in the video patient's situation. Four dimensions of self-reported engagement were assessed retrospectively. Emotional engagement was additionally measured by recording participants' electrodermal and cardiovascular activity continuously while watching. Analyses of variance were used to test the effects of introduction format, camera focus and their interaction. The audiovisual introduction induced a stronger blood pressure response during watching the introduction (p = 0.048, [Formula: see text]= 0.05) and the consultation part of the vignette (p = 0.051, [Formula: see text]= 0.05), when compared to the written introduction. With respect to camera focus, results revealed that the variant focusing on the patient at emotional moments evoked a higher level of electrodermal activity (p = 0.003, [Formula: see text]= 0.06), when compared to the other two variants. Furthermore, an interaction effect was shown on self-reported emotional engagement (p = 0.045, [Formula: see text]= 0.04): the physician-only variant resulted in lower emotional engagement if the vignette was preceded by the audiovisual introduction. No effects were shown on the other dimensions of self-reported engagement. Our findings imply that using an audiovisual introduction combined with alternating camera focus depicting patient's emotions results in the highest levels of emotional engagement in analogue patients. This evidence can inform methodological decisions during the development of video vignettes, and thereby enhance the ecological validity of future video-vignettes studies.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 69 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 19%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Researcher 8 12%
Student > Master 5 7%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 21 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 12 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 16%
Social Sciences 6 9%
Psychology 5 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 26 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 January 2018.
All research outputs
#5,808,024
of 23,016,919 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#826
of 2,030 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#116,732
of 441,339 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#21
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,016,919 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,030 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 441,339 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.