↓ Skip to main content

Physicians Criticizing Physicians to Patients

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
3 blogs
twitter
34 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 Mendeley
Title
Physicians Criticizing Physicians to Patients
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, May 2013
DOI 10.1007/s11606-013-2499-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susan H. McDaniel, Diane S. Morse, Shmuel Reis, Elizabeth A. Edwardsen, Mary Gale Gurnsey, Adam Taupin, Jennifer J. Griggs, Cleveland G. Shields

Abstract

Teamwork is critical to providing excellent healthcare, and effective communication is essential for teamwork. Physicians often discuss patient referrals from other physicians, including referrals from outside their primary institution. Sharing conflicting information or negative judgments of other physicians to patients may be unprofessional. Poor teamwork within healthcare systems has been associated with patient mortality and lower staff well-being. This analysis explored how physicians talk to patients with advanced cancer about care rendered by other physicians. Standardized patients (SPs) portraying advanced lung cancer attended covertly recorded visits with consenting oncologists and family physicians. Twenty community-based oncologists and 19 family physicians had encounters with SPs. Physician comments about care by other physicians were extracted from transcriptions and analyzed qualitatively. These comments were categorized as Supportive or Critical. We also examined whether there were differences between physicians who provide supportive comments and those who provided critical comments. Fourteen of the 34 encounters (41 %) included in this analysis contained a total of 42 comments about the patient's previous care. Twelve of 42 comments (29 %) were coded as Supportive, twenty-eight (67 %) as Critical, and two (4 %) as Neutral. Supportive comments attributed positive qualities to another physician or their care. Critical comments included one specialty criticizing another and general lack of trust in physicians. This study described comments by physicians criticizing other physicians to patients. This behavior may affect patient satisfaction and quality of care. Healthcare system policies and training should discourage this behavior.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 34 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 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Australia 1 1%
Bangladesh 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 68 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Researcher 9 12%
Student > Master 8 11%
Other 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Other 20 27%
Unknown 14 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 38%
Psychology 8 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 8%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 20 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 44. 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 21 September 2021.
All research outputs
#932,528
of 25,191,684 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#758
of 8,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,945
of 200,515 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#14
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,191,684 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,115 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 200,515 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 98 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.