↓ Skip to main content

Medical student use of communication elements and association with patient satisfaction: a prospective observational pilot study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 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
Medical student use of communication elements and association with patient satisfaction: a prospective observational pilot study
Published in
BMC Medical Education, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12909-016-0671-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joseph S. Turner, Katie E. Pettit, Bryce B. Buente, Aloysius J. Humbert, Anthony J. Perkins, Jeffrey A. Kline

Abstract

Effective communication with patients impacts clinical outcome and patient satisfaction. We measure the rate at which medical students use six targeted communication elements with patients and association of element use with patient satisfaction. Participants included fourth year medical students enrolled in an emergency medicine clerkship. A trained observer measured use of six communication elements: acknowledging the patient by name, introducing themselves by name, identifying their role, explaining the care plan, explaining that multiple providers would see the patient, and providing an estimated duration of time in the emergency department. The observer then conducted a survey of patient satisfaction with the medical student encounter. A total of 246 encounters were documented among forty medical student participants. For the six communication elements evaluated, in 61 % of encounters medical students acknowledged the patient, in 91 % they introduced themselves, in 58 % they identified their role as a student, in 64 % they explained the care plan, in 80 % they explained that another provider would see the patient, and in only 6 % they provided an estimated duration of care. Only 1 encounter (0.4 %) contained all six elements. Patients' likelihood to refer a loved one to that ED was increased when students acknowledged the patient and described that other providers would be involved in patient care (P = 0.016 and 0.015 respectively, Chi Square). Likewise, patients' likelihood to return to the ED was increased when students described their role in patient care (P = 0.035, Chi Square). This pilot study demonstrates that medical students infrequently use all targeted communication elements. When they did use certain elements, patient satisfaction increased. These data imply potential benefit to additional training for students in patient communication.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 14%
Student > Master 6 14%
Researcher 3 7%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 10 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 25%
Psychology 2 5%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 14 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 18 July 2016.
All research outputs
#6,917,530
of 22,875,477 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,192
of 3,336 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,600
of 333,164 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#31
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,875,477 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,336 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 333,164 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.