IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v27y1988i9p895-900.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Contributions of patients to general practitioner consultations in relation to their understanding of doctor's instructions and advice

Author

Listed:
  • Robinson, E.J.
  • Whitfield, M.J.

Abstract

126 patients of 6 general practitioners were tape recorded in consultation with their doctor and interviewed immediately afterwards, and 81 of the patients were interviewed again 2 days later. We related the accuracy of patients' accounts of the instructions and advice they were offered to two characteristics of patients' participation during their consultation: (i) the frequency of spontaneous comments or queries about diagnosis, cause, consequences or treatment of the problem presented, and (ii) the frequency of comments and queries which sought to clarify something said by the doctor. The incidence of the latter was unrelated to accuracy of patients' subsequent accounts. However, people who made errors or omissions in both immediate and home interviews in their accounts of instructions and advice offered, were more likely than those who gave accurate accounts to have produced spontaneous comments or queries during their consultation. Whether the doctor accepted, rejected or ignored these ideas was irrelevant to the incidence of post-consultation errors and omissions.

Suggested Citation

  • Robinson, E.J. & Whitfield, M.J., 1988. "Contributions of patients to general practitioner consultations in relation to their understanding of doctor's instructions and advice," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 27(9), pages 895-900, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:27:y:1988:i:9:p:895-900
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(88)90279-1
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:27:y:1988:i:9:p:895-900. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.