Pub Date : 2026-02-07DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2026.109519
Richard M. Frankel
Objective
The scientific study of doctor-patient communication got its start with a textbook published almost nine decades ago. Based on 16 years of conversations between psychiatry residents and patients, it featured audio recordings as a method for studying the subtleties of verbal interaction in the clinical context. Hundreds of studies based on audio and video technology have been published since. The purpose of this paper is threefold. First, I provide a brief history of a line of inquiry based on direct observation and coding of recorded encounters. Second, I describe the development of the Four Habits of Highly Effective Clinicians, one of several evidence-based frameworks for studying and teaching about the medical interview. Third, I describe the phenomenon of documenting in the electronic health record (EHR) while simultaneously providing care. Documenting while doctoring (DWD) is both a resource and a constraint on clinicians’ time and attention. Notwithstanding, its effects on processes and outcomes of care have not typically been accounted for in doctor patient communication frameworks. To that end I describe a mnemonic POISED, to facilitate EHR use in the exam room.
Discussion
In 2004 only 1 of 10 US physicians’ offices used an EHR; in 2023, it was 9 out of 10. Pressures to increase efficiency and billing have resulted in a migration of the EHR from the back room into the exam room. A gap currently exists in research on the effects of DWD on doctor patient communication and outcomes of care. Accumulating evidence suggests that DWD has resulted in increased distraction, inaccurate data recording, and in some cases poorer outcomes of care.
Highlights
Larger studies across multiple medical specialties and a range of patient populations will be necessary to better understand the costs and benefits of the intersection of talk, text, and technology in doctor-patient communication and relationships.
{"title":"From talk to text: Extending the arc of doctor patient communication research to real-time visit documentation","authors":"Richard M. Frankel","doi":"10.1016/j.pec.2026.109519","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.pec.2026.109519","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>The scientific study of doctor-patient communication got its start with a textbook published almost nine decades ago. Based on 16 years of conversations between psychiatry residents and patients, it featured audio recordings as a method for studying the subtleties of verbal interaction in the clinical context. Hundreds of studies based on audio and video technology have been published since. The purpose of this paper is threefold. First, I provide a brief history of a line of inquiry based on direct observation and coding of recorded encounters. Second, I describe the development of the Four Habits of Highly Effective Clinicians, one of several evidence-based frameworks for studying and teaching about the medical interview. Third, I describe the phenomenon of documenting in the electronic health record (EHR) while simultaneously providing care. Documenting while doctoring (DWD) is both a resource and a constraint on clinicians’ time and attention. Notwithstanding, its effects on processes and outcomes of care have not typically been accounted for in doctor patient communication frameworks. To that end I describe a mnemonic POISED, to facilitate EHR use in the exam room.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>In 2004 only 1 of 10 US physicians’ offices used an EHR; in 2023, it was 9 out of 10. Pressures to increase efficiency and billing have resulted in a migration of the EHR from the back room into the exam room. A gap currently exists in research on the effects of DWD on doctor patient communication and outcomes of care. Accumulating evidence suggests that DWD has resulted in increased distraction, inaccurate data recording, and in some cases poorer outcomes of care.</div></div><div><h3>Highlights</h3><div>Larger studies across multiple medical specialties and a range of patient populations will be necessary to better understand the costs and benefits of the intersection of talk, text, and technology in doctor-patient communication and relationships.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49714,"journal":{"name":"Patient Education and Counseling","volume":"147 ","pages":"Article 109519"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146175190","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-05DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2026.109516
Paul K.J. Han , Margrethe Schaufel , Edvin Schei
Objective
To analyze the nature and etiology of shame, a common problem that diminishes the well-being of learners and clinicians in medical education and practice, and to explore the relationship between shame and medical uncertainty.
Discussion
We draw upon various theoretical insights on both shame and uncertainty, and argue that shame is ultimately a product of uncertainty and its transformation by medical learners. We argue that this transformation involves two key processes. The first is a personalization of uncertainty—i.e., a transformation of medical uncertainties focused on clinical care into personal uncertainties focused on one’s self-worth. The second is a resolution of personal uncertainty—i.e., a transformation of personal uncertainties about one’s self-worth into personal certainties about one’s lack of self-worth. These key processes linking medical uncertainty to shame suggest that shame might be prevented or mitigated by targeted interventions aimed at 1) depersonalizing medical uncertainties, 2) helping learners maintain their personal uncertainties, rather than resolving them in self-destructive ways, and 3) making uncertainty and its management a more central, explicit focus of medical training.
Conclusions
Medical uncertainty has a central, paradoxical relationship to shame among medical learners—representing both a source of the problem and a potential solution. Key processes that lead from uncertainty to shame represent potential targets for interventions to prevent and mitigate shame among medical learners, and fruitful directions for future research.
{"title":"Shame among medical learners: An uncertainty-focused conception","authors":"Paul K.J. Han , Margrethe Schaufel , Edvin Schei","doi":"10.1016/j.pec.2026.109516","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.pec.2026.109516","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To analyze the nature and etiology of shame, a common problem that diminishes the well-being of learners and clinicians in medical education and practice, and to explore the relationship between shame and medical uncertainty.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>We draw upon various theoretical insights on both shame and uncertainty, and argue that shame is ultimately a product of uncertainty and its transformation by medical learners. We argue that this transformation involves two key processes. The first is a personalization of uncertainty—i.e., a transformation of medical uncertainties focused on clinical care into personal uncertainties focused on one’s self-worth. The second is a resolution of personal uncertainty—i.e., a transformation of personal uncertainties about one’s self-worth into personal certainties about one’s lack of self-worth. These key processes linking medical uncertainty to shame suggest that shame might be prevented or mitigated by targeted interventions aimed at 1) depersonalizing medical uncertainties, 2) helping learners maintain their personal uncertainties, rather than resolving them in self-destructive ways, and 3) making uncertainty and its management a more central, explicit focus of medical training.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Medical uncertainty has a central, paradoxical relationship to shame among medical learners—representing both a source of the problem and a potential solution. Key processes that lead from uncertainty to shame represent potential targets for interventions to prevent and mitigate shame among medical learners, and fruitful directions for future research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49714,"journal":{"name":"Patient Education and Counseling","volume":"147 ","pages":"Article 109516"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146167470","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-05DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2026.109518
Alan Schwartz , Saul J. Weiner
Objective
Contextualizing care results in better outcomes for patients. Several different prompts to clinicians to increase contextualization have been studied: audit & feedback (A&F), clinical decision support (CDS), or making recording of visits openly accessible to patients (OA). We measured the effects of prompting interventions on probing of contextual red flags and incorporation of contextual factors into care plans.
Methods
Individual participant data meta-analysis of data from three controlled studies of prompts. The first (A&F, 4160 visits to 667 physicians at 6 sites) employed reports to provider teams of missed and successful contextualization opportunities. The second (CDS, 450 visits to 39 physicians at 2 sites) employed a real-time CDS tool. The third (OA, 317 visits to 30 physicians at 2 sites) cued providers that visits were recorded and would be available to patients. In each, the audios were coded using the 4 C system to identify contextual red flags, clinician probes of red flags, contextual factors, and contextualization of care plans.
Results
Prompting interventions increased the odds of probing by 71 % (95 % CI 54 % - 79 %) on average, with the largest impact in the A&F study but the highest probing rate in the CDS study. Overall, they increased the odds of contextualizing care plans by 33 % (95 % CI 13 %-58 %), an effect partially mediated by probing of red flags, which increased the odds of contextualization by 337 % (95 % CI 287 % - 396 %). Contextual factors in the domains of Access to Care, Financial Situation, Emotional State, and Skills, Abilities, and Knowledge were most likely to be incorporated into plans and those in Competing Responsibilities least so.
Conclusion
Multiple strategies prompt clinicians to consider patient life context in care planning, with varying effectiveness according to the patient context.
Practical implications
Future efforts should consider combining prompting interventions and provide clinicians with additional domain-specific resources.
目的情境化护理可提高患者的预后。已经研究了几种不同的提示临床医生增加情境化:审计和反馈(A&;F),临床决策支持(CDS),或使访问记录对患者开放(OA)。我们测量了提示干预对探查情境危险信号和将情境因素纳入护理计划的影响。方法对三项提示性对照研究的个体参与者数据进行meta分析。第一项研究(在6个地点对667名医生进行了4160次访问)向医疗团队报告了错过和成功的情境化机会。第二组(CDS,在2个地点对39名医生进行450次访问)采用实时CDS工具。第三份(OA,在2个地点对30名医生进行了317次就诊)提示医疗服务提供者,就诊记录已被记录下来,并可供患者使用。在每个音频中,使用4 C系统对音频进行编码,以识别上下文危险信号、临床医生对危险信号的探测、上下文因素和护理计划的上下文化。结果提示干预平均使探查的几率增加71 %(95 % CI 54 % - 79 %),在A&;F研究中影响最大,但在CDS研究中探查率最高。总体而言,他们将情境化护理计划的几率增加了33 %(95 % CI 13 %-58 %),这一效应部分由探测危险信号介导,它将情境化的几率增加了337 %(95 % CI 287 % - 396 %)。在获得护理、财务状况、情绪状态、技能、能力和知识等领域的背景因素最有可能被纳入计划,而在竞争责任方面的因素则最少。结论多种策略促使临床医生在护理计划中考虑患者的生活环境,根据患者的生活环境不同,其效果也不同。实际意义未来的努力应考虑结合提示干预措施,并为临床医生提供额外的领域特定资源。
{"title":"Increasing contextualization of care rates through clinician prompting interventions","authors":"Alan Schwartz , Saul J. Weiner","doi":"10.1016/j.pec.2026.109518","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.pec.2026.109518","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Contextualizing care results in better outcomes for patients. Several different prompts to clinicians to increase contextualization have been studied: audit & feedback (A&F), clinical decision support (CDS), or making recording of visits openly accessible to patients (OA). We measured the effects of prompting interventions on probing of contextual red flags and incorporation of contextual factors into care plans.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Individual participant data meta-analysis of data from three controlled studies of prompts. The first (A&F, 4160 visits to 667 physicians at 6 sites) employed reports to provider teams of missed and successful contextualization opportunities. The second (CDS, 450 visits to 39 physicians at 2 sites) employed a real-time CDS tool. The third (OA, 317 visits to 30 physicians at 2 sites) cued providers that visits were recorded and would be available to patients. In each, the audios were coded using the 4 C system to identify contextual red flags, clinician probes of red flags, contextual factors, and contextualization of care plans.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Prompting interventions increased the odds of probing by 71 % (95 % CI 54 % - 79 %) on average, with the largest impact in the A&F study but the highest probing rate in the CDS study. Overall, they increased the odds of contextualizing care plans by 33 % (95 % CI 13 %-58 %), an effect partially mediated by probing of red flags, which increased the odds of contextualization by 337 % (95 % CI 287 % - 396 %). Contextual factors in the domains of Access to Care, Financial Situation, Emotional State, and Skills, Abilities, and Knowledge were most likely to be incorporated into plans and those in Competing Responsibilities least so.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Multiple strategies prompt clinicians to consider patient life context in care planning, with varying effectiveness according to the patient context.</div></div><div><h3>Practical implications</h3><div>Future efforts should consider combining prompting interventions and provide clinicians with additional domain-specific resources.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49714,"journal":{"name":"Patient Education and Counseling","volume":"147 ","pages":"Article 109518"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146175189","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-05DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2026.109514
Ellen M A Smets, Wolf A Langewitz, Sandra van Dulmen
Objective: Access to accurate and appropriate information is crucial for patients' wellbeing and participation in decision-making. Patients' information needs are subject to change; this concerns the content as well as the amount, timing and mode of information delivery. Moreover, patients differ in their information processing capacity. Consequently, healthcare professionals should preferably tailor their information to individual patients' preexisting knowledge, cognitive abilities, as well as their emerging information needs. Based on own research and experience in medical teaching, this discussion paper aims to critically reflect on what we know about person-centered communication practices that promote such tailoring of information, i.e. providing patients with information that can help them to manage and understand their symptoms or disease.
Discussion: For various reasons, tailoring can be challenging. Recommendations are provided for healthcare professionals who wish to identify their patients' specific information needs as regards certain topics and the amount of detail they desire. Additionally, communication practices are discussed that promote patients' understanding and recall of information.
Conclusion: Providing patients with information that can help them requires curiosity, creativity and the skillful use of various communication practices.
{"title":"The art and science of providing patients with helpful information.","authors":"Ellen M A Smets, Wolf A Langewitz, Sandra van Dulmen","doi":"10.1016/j.pec.2026.109514","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2026.109514","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Access to accurate and appropriate information is crucial for patients' wellbeing and participation in decision-making. Patients' information needs are subject to change; this concerns the content as well as the amount, timing and mode of information delivery. Moreover, patients differ in their information processing capacity. Consequently, healthcare professionals should preferably tailor their information to individual patients' preexisting knowledge, cognitive abilities, as well as their emerging information needs. Based on own research and experience in medical teaching, this discussion paper aims to critically reflect on what we know about person-centered communication practices that promote such tailoring of information, i.e. providing patients with information that can help them to manage and understand their symptoms or disease.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>For various reasons, tailoring can be challenging. Recommendations are provided for healthcare professionals who wish to identify their patients' specific information needs as regards certain topics and the amount of detail they desire. Additionally, communication practices are discussed that promote patients' understanding and recall of information.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Providing patients with information that can help them requires curiosity, creativity and the skillful use of various communication practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":49714,"journal":{"name":"Patient Education and Counseling","volume":"147 ","pages":"109514"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146221769","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-05DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2026.109520
Amanda McArthur , Alya Ahmad , Anne R. Links , Kathleen R. Warner , Paul Drew , Mary Catherine Beach , Somnath Saha
Objective
Language in electronic health records (EHRs) can transmit stigma, discrediting patients in ways that undermine the clinician-patient relationship and compromise future care. We sought to develop a taxonomy of stigmatizing language in EHRs to understand what patients are being stigmatized for, how that stigma is conveyed linguistically, and why.
Methods
We conducted a two-stage qualitative analysis of EHR notes from multiple clinical contexts in a large U.S. academic health system. For both stages, we drew enriched samples using natural language processing (NLP) to identify notes with at least one stigmatizing keyword from prior studies. First, we open coded 296 notes to generate categories of stigmatizing language and linguistic mechanisms, and to develop a preliminary taxonomy. We then applied and refined this framework by coding 400 additional notes.
Results
We identified six categories of stigmatizing sentiments characterizing patients as: (1) Socially Undesirable, (2) Difficult to Interact With, (3) Incompetent, (4) Manipulative, (5) Noncompliant, and (6) Not Credible. These were implied through negative descriptions of patient behavior portraying them as, e.g., Demanding, Adversarial, Deceptive, etc. Linguistic mechanisms extended beyond keywords, including practices for emphasizing the intensity of patient behavior (e.g., intensifiers), marking distance or divergence from the patient’s perspective (e.g., skeptical evidentials), and casting the clinician as the neutral or rational party (e.g., euphemisms).
Conclusion
Stigmatizing language in EHRs is not limited to discrete terms but is embedded in broader linguistic practices that shape how patients are represented and understood, particularly those describing how they fail to align with clinical expectations. This language may serve to document professional challenges, but it nonetheless reinforces paternalistic norms and compromises care. Understanding these dynamics is critical for moving toward patient-centered documentation and reducing harm in the EHR.
{"title":"How words discredit: A taxonomy of stigmatizing language in the electronic health record","authors":"Amanda McArthur , Alya Ahmad , Anne R. Links , Kathleen R. Warner , Paul Drew , Mary Catherine Beach , Somnath Saha","doi":"10.1016/j.pec.2026.109520","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.pec.2026.109520","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Language in electronic health records (EHRs) can transmit stigma, discrediting patients in ways that undermine the clinician-patient relationship and compromise future care. We sought to develop a taxonomy of stigmatizing language in EHRs to understand <em>what</em> patients are being stigmatized for, <em>how</em> that stigma is conveyed linguistically, and <em>why</em>.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conducted a two-stage qualitative analysis of EHR notes from multiple clinical contexts in a large U.S. academic health system. For both stages, we drew enriched samples using natural language processing (NLP) to identify notes with at least one stigmatizing keyword from prior studies. First, we open coded 296 notes to generate categories of stigmatizing language and linguistic mechanisms, and to develop a preliminary taxonomy. We then applied and refined this framework by coding 400 additional notes.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We identified six categories of stigmatizing sentiments characterizing patients as: (1) Socially Undesirable, (2) Difficult to Interact With, (3) Incompetent, (4) Manipulative, (5) Noncompliant, and (6) Not Credible. These were implied through negative descriptions of patient behavior portraying them as, e.g., Demanding, Adversarial, Deceptive, etc. Linguistic mechanisms extended beyond keywords, including practices for emphasizing the intensity of patient behavior (e.g., intensifiers), marking distance or divergence from the patient’s perspective (e.g., skeptical evidentials), and casting the clinician as the neutral or rational party (e.g., euphemisms).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Stigmatizing language in EHRs is not limited to discrete terms but is embedded in broader linguistic practices that shape how patients are represented and understood, particularly those describing how they fail to align with clinical expectations. This language may serve to document professional challenges, but it nonetheless reinforces paternalistic norms and compromises care. Understanding these dynamics is critical for moving toward patient-centered documentation and reducing harm in the EHR.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49714,"journal":{"name":"Patient Education and Counseling","volume":"147 ","pages":"Article 109520"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146175188","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-05DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2026.109517
Jennifer Gerwing , Julia Menichetti , Anne Marie Landmark
Objective
Dialogues between clinicians and patients constitute complex, dynamic systems comparable to human physiology. While human physiology focuses on the internal regulation of the body, interaction physiology focuses on the observable regulation between participants who are talking with each other. We draw attention to just one fundamental property of interaction physiology, namely that interaction is a continuous process of participants inferring meaning from what each other says and does. We unpack several sequences from authentic clinical dialogues to exemplify such inferential processes.
Discussion
Each contribution in a dialogue serves a function and meaning beyond its literal sense, indeed it has meaning potential, in that its meaning is dependent on the sense that interlocutors make of it, based on its immediate context (i.e., what has happened so far in the conversation and the broader context of time, purpose, and setting). Concrete, practical implications for clinicians are the following: to appreciate what is gained by paying close attention to what the patient says and does; to notice possible misalignments in understanding; to use opportunities that dialogue offers to bring the topic of understanding to the fore. For researchers, particularly ones who are not working within established analytical traditions, awareness of inferential processes entails developing the discipline (and humility) of differentiating between one’s own inferences as an observer and the participants’ displayed inferences while they respond to each other in real time.
Conclusions
We suggest that clinicians need communication recommendations to help them make sense of their interactions with patients in situ, supporting their ability to pay attention to what each patient is saying and doing in the moment. Such advice depends on distilling and promoting practice from a solid foundation of basic research on language use.
{"title":"Towards an interaction physiology: Unpacking the inferential property of language use","authors":"Jennifer Gerwing , Julia Menichetti , Anne Marie Landmark","doi":"10.1016/j.pec.2026.109517","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.pec.2026.109517","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Dialogues between clinicians and patients constitute complex, dynamic systems comparable to human physiology. While human physiology focuses on the internal regulation of the body, <em>interaction physiology</em> focuses on the observable regulation between participants who are talking with each other. We draw attention to just one fundamental property of interaction physiology, namely that interaction is a continuous process of participants <em>inferring meaning</em> from what each other says and does. We unpack several sequences from authentic clinical dialogues to exemplify such inferential processes.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>Each contribution in a dialogue serves a function and meaning beyond its literal sense, indeed it has <em>meaning potential</em>, in that its meaning is dependent on the sense that interlocutors make of it, based on its immediate context (i.e., what has happened so far in the conversation and the broader context of time, purpose, and setting). Concrete, practical implications for clinicians are the following: to appreciate what is gained by paying close attention to what the patient says and does; to notice possible misalignments in understanding; to use opportunities that dialogue offers to bring the topic of understanding to the fore. For researchers, particularly ones who are not working within established analytical traditions, awareness of inferential processes entails developing the discipline (and humility) of differentiating between one’s own inferences as an observer and the participants’ displayed inferences while they respond to each other in real time.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>We suggest that clinicians need communication recommendations to help them make sense of their interactions with patients in situ, supporting their ability to pay attention to what each patient is saying and doing in the moment. Such advice depends on distilling and promoting practice from a solid foundation of basic research on language use.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49714,"journal":{"name":"Patient Education and Counseling","volume":"147 ","pages":"Article 109517"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146175192","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-04DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2026.109511
Or Friedman
Objective
To examine patient-surgeon communication challenges in aesthetic surgery and identify effective strategies for expectation management and informed consent through narrative review of current literature.
Methods
A comprehensive narrative review was conducted using PubMed, PsycINFO, and communication databases (2010–2024). Search terms included "aesthetic surgery," "patient communication," "expectations," "informed consent," and "social media." Literature was analyzed thematically to identify key communication challenges, digital media influences, and evidence-based intervention strategies.
Results
This review identifies three primary themes and proposes an integrated framework combining traditional communication barriers with digital-era influences: (1) Communication barriers arise from the subjective nature of aesthetic goals and patients' difficulty articulating desires in clinical terms; (2) Social media significantly influences patient expectations, with recent surveys indicating that a substantial majority of facial plastic surgeons encounter patients requesting procedures to improve social media appearance—representing a significant increase from earlier years; (3) Evidence-based visual communication tools and structured decision aids demonstrate effectiveness in aligning expectations and improving satisfaction. Studies consistently show that unmet expectations account for 14.4 % of malpractice claims in plastic surgery versus 3.8 % in other medical specialties.
Conclusion
This review presents a comprehensive integrated communication framework specifically designed for the digital era of aesthetic surgery practice. Effective patient-surgeon communication now requires specialized approaches that address both traditional expectation management and unprecedented social media influences on patient goals.
Practice Implications
Surgeons should implement structured communication protocols including visual outcome ranges, psychological expectation assessment, and explicit discussion of social media influences. Professional development programs must emphasize communication skills specific to aesthetic consultation, with particular attention to cultural competence and digital literacy.
{"title":"Expectation management and patient-surgeon communication in aesthetic surgery: A narrative review of current challenges and communication strategies","authors":"Or Friedman","doi":"10.1016/j.pec.2026.109511","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.pec.2026.109511","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To examine patient-surgeon communication challenges in aesthetic surgery and identify effective strategies for expectation management and informed consent through narrative review of current literature.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A comprehensive narrative review was conducted using PubMed, PsycINFO, and communication databases (2010–2024). Search terms included \"aesthetic surgery,\" \"patient communication,\" \"expectations,\" \"informed consent,\" and \"social media.\" Literature was analyzed thematically to identify key communication challenges, digital media influences, and evidence-based intervention strategies.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>This review identifies three primary themes and proposes <strong>an</strong> integrated framework combining traditional communication barriers with digital-era influences: (1) Communication barriers arise from the subjective nature of aesthetic goals and patients' difficulty articulating desires in clinical terms; (2) Social media significantly influences patient expectations, with recent surveys indicating that a substantial majority of facial plastic surgeons encounter patients requesting procedures to improve social media appearance—representing a significant increase from earlier years; (3) Evidence-based visual communication tools and structured decision aids demonstrate effectiveness in aligning expectations and improving satisfaction. Studies consistently show that unmet expectations account for 14.4 % of malpractice claims in plastic surgery versus 3.8 % in other medical specialties.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>This review presents a comprehensive integrated communication framework specifically designed for the digital era of aesthetic surgery practice. Effective patient-surgeon communication now requires specialized approaches that address both traditional expectation management and unprecedented social media influences on patient goals.</div></div><div><h3>Practice Implications</h3><div>Surgeons should implement structured communication protocols including visual outcome ranges, psychological expectation assessment, and explicit discussion of social media influences. Professional development programs must emphasize communication skills specific to aesthetic consultation, with particular attention to cultural competence and digital literacy.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49714,"journal":{"name":"Patient Education and Counseling","volume":"146 ","pages":"Article 109511"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146138128","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-04DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2026.109531
Renata W. Yen , Aditya Singh , Diane Chen , Paul J. Barr , Daniel Kang , Glyn Elwyn
Objective
Poor communication in clinical encounters impacts both clinical and patient outcomes. We aimed to summarize the available data on the measurement and use of clinician-spoken plain language, as well as the associations between elements of plain language use and patient outcomes.
Methods
Using Arksey and O’Malley’s framework, we conducted a scoping review of the published literature through November 2024 including any analysis of clinician use of plain language in English-based clinical encounters. We assessed study quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute cross-sectional assessment tool. We summarized our findings qualitatively.
Results
From 4398 unique citations, we found 36 papers (utilizing 34 distinct datasets) meeting our criteria. Studies were published from 2007 to 2023 and included 1225 clinicians total (range: 2–214) across many clinical settings. Study quality was mixed, although most (28/36, 77.8 %) measured plain language outcomes using reliable methods. Use of medical terminology was measured in 21/36 (58.3 %) studies, where all used manual methods to count terms, and some supplemented (5/21, 23.8 %) with automation. Median medical terms per encounter was 19.5 (range: 2.4–72.3), but interpretation was limited since encounter length varied substantially. Language complexity was measured in 15/36 (41.7 %), primarily using methods designed for written text. The average transcript grade level was 6.3 (range: 2.7–9.8; sixth grade). Only 4/36 (11.1 %) reported findings back to clinicians.
Conclusion
This review offers insight into an emerging area of research in measuring clinician-spoken plain language. Significant heterogeneity exists in the elements that are measured, methods used, and findings. Future research should account for variation in encounter length. The use of automated analysis methods is growing, but limited, in this field.
Practice implications
Measuring clinician-spoken plain language is an emerging area with potential applications in medical and continuing education. Real-world implementation may be supported through standardization of measurement methods and delivering results back to clinicians.
{"title":"Measuring the use of spoken plain language by clinicians in healthcare encounters: A scoping review","authors":"Renata W. Yen , Aditya Singh , Diane Chen , Paul J. Barr , Daniel Kang , Glyn Elwyn","doi":"10.1016/j.pec.2026.109531","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.pec.2026.109531","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Poor communication in clinical encounters impacts both clinical and patient outcomes. We aimed to summarize the available data on the measurement and use of clinician-spoken plain language, as well as the associations between elements of plain language use and patient outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Using Arksey and O’Malley’s framework, we conducted a scoping review of the published literature through November 2024 including any analysis of clinician use of plain language in English-based clinical encounters. We assessed study quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute cross-sectional assessment tool. We summarized our findings qualitatively.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>From 4398 unique citations, we found 36 papers (utilizing 34 distinct datasets) meeting our criteria. Studies were published from 2007 to 2023 and included 1225 clinicians total (range: 2–214) across many clinical settings. Study quality was mixed, although most (28/36, 77.8 %) measured plain language outcomes using reliable methods. Use of medical terminology was measured in 21/36 (58.3 %) studies, where all used manual methods to count terms, and some supplemented (5/21, 23.8 %) with automation. Median medical terms per encounter was 19.5 (range: 2.4–72.3), but interpretation was limited since encounter length varied substantially. Language complexity was measured in 15/36 (41.7 %), primarily using methods designed for written text. The average transcript grade level was 6.3 (range: 2.7–9.8; sixth grade). Only 4/36 (11.1 %) reported findings back to clinicians.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>This review offers insight into an emerging area of research in measuring clinician-spoken plain language. Significant heterogeneity exists in the elements that are measured, methods used, and findings. Future research should account for variation in encounter length. The use of automated analysis methods is growing, but limited, in this field.</div></div><div><h3>Practice implications</h3><div>Measuring clinician-spoken plain language is an emerging area with potential applications in medical and continuing education. Real-world implementation may be supported through standardization of measurement methods and delivering results back to clinicians.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49714,"journal":{"name":"Patient Education and Counseling","volume":"147 ","pages":"Article 109531"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146175109","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-03DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2026.109510
Yaël Busnel , Ibtissem Ben Dridi , Mathilde Lochmann , Laurie Panse , Stéphane Cognon , Claude Ganter , Sarah Prudhomme , Anne Termoz , Pascale Sontag , Pauline Maisani , Aurélien Troisoeufs , Emmanuelle Jouet , Véronique Christophe , Marie Preau , Marie-Pascale Pomey , Julie Haesebaert
{"title":"Corrigendum to “Co-designing peer-to-peer support in oncology: A participatory study on the development of the PaRole OncO France model” [Patient Educ. Couns. 143 (2026) 109415]","authors":"Yaël Busnel , Ibtissem Ben Dridi , Mathilde Lochmann , Laurie Panse , Stéphane Cognon , Claude Ganter , Sarah Prudhomme , Anne Termoz , Pascale Sontag , Pauline Maisani , Aurélien Troisoeufs , Emmanuelle Jouet , Véronique Christophe , Marie Preau , Marie-Pascale Pomey , Julie Haesebaert","doi":"10.1016/j.pec.2026.109510","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.pec.2026.109510","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":49714,"journal":{"name":"Patient Education and Counseling","volume":"146 ","pages":"Article 109510"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146120751","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-03DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2026.109506
Anne Maas , Elena Bertolini , Kathleen Ostheim , Hanne C. Lie , Charlotte Demoor-Goldschmidt , Miklós Garami , Gisela Michel , Anica Ilic
Objective
Childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer survivors (CAYACS) often report cancer-related knowledge gaps. Addressing their information needs is associated with better quality of life. We aimed to explore and synthesize evidence on CAYACS’ cancer-related information needs and identify associated characteristics.
Methods
Peer-reviewed articles on information needs in adult CAYACS ≥ 5 years post-diagnosis were systematically searched in PubMed, PsycINFO, and Scopus. The quality of included publications was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, and results were narratively synthesized.
Results
Twenty-one studies (n = 10 quantitative, n = 8 qualitative, n = 3 mixed-methods) with a total of 5624 participants (range: 14–1386 per study) were included. Between 51 % and 77 % of CAYACS had at least one information need. Needs were reported across 11 domains, including cancer-related health information (2 %-86 %), follow-up care and prevention (2 %-91 %), healthcare system interactions (9 %-36 %), living a healthy lifestyle (4 %-60 %), psychosocial well-being and support (12 %-40 %), sexual health (<1 %-32 %), finances (2 %-50 %), relationships (2 %-20 %), education and employment (<1 %-18 %), insurances (28 %-47 %), and peer support (7 %-35 %). The highest prevalences were observed in follow-up discussions on current health (92 %) and late effects (19 %-86 %). Female sex, older age at study, lower educational attainment, poorer mental and physical health, longer time since diagnosis/treatment, central nervous system tumor diagnosis, and lack of written information were associated with more information needs.
Conclusions and practice implications
Adult CAYACS report significant information needs years after treatment, particularly regarding cancer-related health information, follow-up care and prevention, and lifestyle. Addressing these needs with age-appropriate, individualized information may improve their quality of life. Electronic and mobile health tools are promising methods to provide such support.
{"title":"Information needs of adult childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer survivors (CAYACS): A systematic review","authors":"Anne Maas , Elena Bertolini , Kathleen Ostheim , Hanne C. Lie , Charlotte Demoor-Goldschmidt , Miklós Garami , Gisela Michel , Anica Ilic","doi":"10.1016/j.pec.2026.109506","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.pec.2026.109506","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer survivors (CAYACS) often report cancer-related knowledge gaps. Addressing their information needs is associated with better quality of life. We aimed to explore and synthesize evidence on CAYACS’ cancer-related information needs and identify associated characteristics.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Peer-reviewed articles on information needs in adult CAYACS ≥ 5 years post-diagnosis were systematically searched in PubMed, PsycINFO, and Scopus. The quality of included publications was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, and results were narratively synthesized.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Twenty-one studies (n = 10 quantitative, n = 8 qualitative, n = 3 mixed-methods) with a total of 5624 participants (range: 14–1386 per study) were included. Between 51 % and 77 % of CAYACS had at least one information need. Needs were reported across 11 domains, including cancer-related health information (2 %-86 %), follow-up care and prevention (2 %-91 %), healthcare system interactions (9 %-36 %), living a healthy lifestyle (4 %-60 %), psychosocial well-being and support (12 %-40 %), sexual health (<1 %-32 %), finances (2 %-50 %), relationships (2 %-20 %), education and employment (<1 %-18 %), insurances (28 %-47 %), and peer support (7 %-35 %). The highest prevalences were observed in follow-up discussions on current health (92 %) and late effects (19 %-86 %). Female sex, older age at study, lower educational attainment, poorer mental and physical health, longer time since diagnosis/treatment, central nervous system tumor diagnosis, and lack of written information were associated with more information needs.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions and practice implications</h3><div>Adult CAYACS report significant information needs years after treatment, particularly regarding cancer-related health information, follow-up care and prevention, and lifestyle. Addressing these needs with age-appropriate, individualized information may improve their quality of life. Electronic and mobile health tools are promising methods to provide such support.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49714,"journal":{"name":"Patient Education and Counseling","volume":"146 ","pages":"Article 109506"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2026-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146144645","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}