The Significance of Physician-Patient Communication on Telemedicine Patients’ Health Outcomes: Evidence from Indonesia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The importance of physician-patient communication on patient health outcomes has been globally known. Poor communication in clinical settings, including in telemedicine visits, has been identified as a key barrier to successful medical consultation. This barrier is even more prevalent among people from linguistically and culturally diverse communities. This study investigated the influence of physician-patient communication on telemedicine patient health outcomes in Indonesia, a developing country with great linguistic and cultural diversity. This study utilized secondary data from a telemedicine utilization survey conducted during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Socioeconomic factors and communication features were included as predictors of patients' health improvement. Logistic regressions were utilized to examine the significance of the communication features on patients' health. The analysis results indicated that five communication features including the adequacy of consultation length, a timely physician response, the provision of an explanation of the medication and possible side effects, the patient's ability to utter their physical condition and opinion regarding medication goals, and the patient's ability to comprehend physician explanations and instructions were significantly associated with the patient's health outcomes. Physicians and healthcare providers should focus on the provision of communication features revealed in this study to elevate the likelihood of improved health conditions in telemedicine patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it