↓ Skip to main content

The role of emotion in clinical decision making: an integrative literature review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, December 2017
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 (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
61 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
145 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
416 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
The role of emotion in clinical decision making: an integrative literature review
Published in
BMC Medical Education, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12909-017-1089-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Desirée Kozlowski, Marie Hutchinson, John Hurley, Joanne Rowley, Joanna Sutherland

Abstract

Traditionally, clinical decision making has been perceived as a purely rational and cognitive process. Recently, a number of authors have linked emotional intelligence (EI) to clinical decision making (CDM) and calls have been made for an increased focus on EI skills for clinicians. The objective of this integrative literature review was to identify and synthesise the empirical evidence for a role of emotion in CDM. A systematic search of the bibliographic databases PubMed, PsychINFO, and CINAHL (EBSCO) was conducted to identify empirical studies of clinician populations. Search terms were focused to identify studies reporting clinician emotion OR clinician emotional intelligence OR emotional competence AND clinical decision making OR clinical reasoning. Twenty three papers were retained for synthesis. These represented empirical work from qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods approaches and comprised work with a focus on experienced emotion and on skills associated with emotional intelligence. The studies examined nurses (10), physicians (7), occupational therapists (1), physiotherapists (1), mixed clinician samples (3), and unspecified infectious disease experts (1). We identified two main themes in the context of clinical decision making: the subjective experience of emotion; and, the application of emotion and cognition in CDM. Sub-themes under the subjective experience of emotion were: emotional response to contextual pressures; emotional responses to others; and, intentional exclusion of emotion from CDM. Under the application of emotion and cognition in CDM, sub-themes were: compassionate emotional labour - responsiveness to patient emotion within CDM; interdisciplinary tension regarding the significance and meaning of emotion in CDM; and, emotion and moral judgement. Clinicians' experienced emotions can and do affect clinical decision making, although acknowledgement of that is far from universal. Importantly, this occurs in the in the absence of a clear theoretical framework and educational preparation may not reflect the importance of emotional competence to effective CDM.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 61 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 416 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 416 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 71 17%
Student > Bachelor 57 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 5%
Researcher 18 4%
Other 86 21%
Unknown 139 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 97 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 68 16%
Psychology 30 7%
Social Sciences 11 3%
Neuroscience 9 2%
Other 50 12%
Unknown 151 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 43. 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 16 January 2024.
All research outputs
#971,096
of 25,418,993 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#71
of 3,990 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,803
of 444,462 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#2
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,418,993 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 3,990 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 444,462 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.