ArticleJournal of patient experience2020
The Influence of Patient-Provider Communication on Cancer Screening.
Article in Journal of patient experience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Factors promoting breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screenings participation: A systematic review.Psycho-oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Knowledge, Attitudes, and Perceptions of the Physician's Role in Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Primary Care Patients in Msaken, Tunisia, 2026.Preventing chronic disease · 2026Article
- Assessment of knowledge, attitude, and practices of Lebanese diabetic patients and their relation to medication adherence and doctor-patient communication: A cross-sectional study.Journal of public health research · 2026Article
- How and Under What Conditions Do Patient Portals Improve Cancer Screening Completion: A Scoping Review.AJPM focus · 2026Review
- Cervical cancer screening coverage and care cascade in Tamil Nadu, India, based on a community-based cross-sectional survey.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Socioeconomic Factors Impact the Perception of Healthcare Experiences in Patients with Cirrhosis.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Article
- Communicating abnormal cervical cancer screening results - a focus group study with general practitioners in Norway.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2025Article
- Breast cancer screening and prevention in the UAE: a cross-sectional study of risk awareness and provider engagement.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Iterative Situated Engagement Perspective: Meaning-Making Challenges Across Cancer Screening Phases.Cancers · 2025Article
- Association of Cancer Risk Perception and Patient-provider Communication with Pap Test Among African American and Sub-Saharan African-born Women.Journal of community health · 2025Article
- The Role of Sociodemographic Characteristics and Social Determinants of Health in Influencing the Perceived Quality of Patient-Provider Communication.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2025Article
- Health Information Technology Use among Foreign-Born Adults of Middle Eastern and North African Descent in the United States.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2024Article
- Article
- How Can Clinical Communication Alleviate the Negative Impacts of Social Determinants of Health?: A Secondary HINTS 6 Dataset Analysis.Journal of patient experience · 2024Article
- Health information technology use among foreign-born adults of Middle Eastern and North African decent in the United States.Research square · 2023Article
- Colorectal cancer screening disparities in Asian Americans: the influences of patient-provider communication and social media use.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2023Article
- Brain Tumor at Diagnosis: From Cognition and Behavior to Quality of Life.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Association between Patient-Provider Communication and Self-Perceived Mental Health in US Adults with Cancer: Real-World Evidence through Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Examining Associations between Source of Cancer Information and Mammography Behavior among Black Church-Going Women.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- The Impact of IT-Based Healthcare Communication on Mammography Screening Utilization among Women in the United States: National Health Interview Survey (2011-2018).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Few studies have examined how different qualities and modes (face-to-face vs electronic) of patient-provider communication (PPC) influence cancer screening uptake. Our objective was to determine whether receiving a breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening is influenced by (1) qualities of face-to-face and (2) the use of e-mail PPC. We analyzed Health Information National Trends Survey 4, cycles 1 to 4 data. To assess qualities of face-to-face PPC, adults reported how often physicians spent enough time with them, explained so they understood, gave them a chance to ask questions, addressed feelings and emotions, involved them in decisions, confirmed understanding, and helped them with uncertainty. Adults reported whether they used e-mail PPC. We used multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the odds of receiving cancer screenings based on face-to-face and e-mail PPC. Adults whose health-care providers involved them in decision-making had highest odds of receiving breast (odds ratio [OR] = 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.11-1.71), cervical (OR = 1.30; 95% CI = 1.06-1.60), and colorectal (OR = 1.25; 95% CI = 1.03-1.51) cancer screenings. No significant associations were observed between e-mail PPC and cancer screenings. More research is needed to explore this association.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.