MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4321132561 · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.101855

Effect of health-care professionals’ weight status on patient satisfaction and recalled advice: a prospective cohort study

2023· article· en· W4321132561 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Martin Čadek, Susanne Täuber, Blake J. Lawrence, Stuart W. Flint

Notice bibliographique

RevueEClinicalMedicine · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueObesity and Health Practices
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesJohnson and JohnsonPublic Health EnglandNovo NordiskNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchSheffield Hallam University
Mots-clésMedicineHealth careOverweightFamily medicineStigma (botany)Health professionalsPatient satisfactionBody mass indexCohortCohort studyGerontologyNursingPsychiatry

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background Research has demonstrated that healthcare professionals are not immune to weight stigma attitudes, with evidence showing that people living with overweight or obesity may experience direct and indirect stigma and discrimination. This can impact the quality of care provided and impact patients' engagement in healthcare. Despite this, there is a paucity of research examining patient attitudes towards healthcare professionals living with overweight or obesity, which can also hold implications for the patient–practitioner relationship. Thus, this study examined whether healthcare professionals' weight status impacts patient satisfaction and recalled advice. Methods In this prospective cohort study, using an experimental design, 237 participants (113 women, 125 men) aged 32 ± 8.92 with a body mass index of 25.87 ± 6.79 kg m 2 were recruited through a participant pooling service (ProlificTM), word of mouth, and social media. The majority of participants were from the UK: 119, followed by participants from the USA: 65, Czechia: 16, Canada: 11, and other countries (N = 26). Participants completed an online experiment consisting of questionnaires assessing satisfaction with healthcare professionals and recalled advice after exposure to one of eight conditions assessing the impact of healthcare professional weight status (lower weight or obesity), gender (woman or man) and profession (psychologist or dietitian). A novel approach to creating the stimuli was used to exposure participants to healthcare professionals of different weight status. All of the participants responded to the experiment hosted on Qualtrics™ in the period from June 8, 2016 to July 5, 2017. Study hypotheses were examined using linear regression with dummy variables and follow up post-hoc analysis to estimate marginal means with adjustment for planned comparisons. Findings The only statistically significant result was a difference with a small effect in patient satisfaction, where satisfaction was significantly higher in healthcare professional who was a women living with obesity compared to healthcare professional who was a man living with obesity (estimate = −0.30; SE = 0.08; df = 229; ωₚ 2 = 0.05; CI = −0.49 to −0.11; p < 0.001), and healthcare professional who was a women living with lower weight compared to healthcare professional who was a man living with lower weight (estimate = −0.21; SE = 0.08; df = 229; CI = −0.39 to −0.02; ωₚ 2 = 0.02; p = 0.02). There were no statistically significant differences in satisfaction of healthcare professionals and recall of advice in the lower weight compared to obesity conditions. Interpretation This study has used novel experimental stimuli to examine weight stigma towards healthcare professionals which is vastly under-researched and holds implications for the patient–practitioner relationship. Our findings showed statistically significant differences and a small effect where satisfaction with healthcare professionals both living with obesity and with a lower weight were higher when the healthcare professional was a woman compared to man. This research should act as a stimulus for further research that aims to examine the impact of healthcare professional gender on patient responses, satisfaction and engagement, and weight stigma from patients towards healthcare professionals. Funding Sheffield Hallam University.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,008
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,026
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,819

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0080,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,037
Tête enseignante GPT0,505
Écart entre enseignants0,468 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations9
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEClinicalMedicineMême sujetObesity and Health PracticesTravaux en français237 207