MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Our Role in Effective Patient-Provider Communication

2011· article· en· W755559501 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paul R. Rao

Bibliographic record

VenueASHA Leader · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAshaMandateHealth carePublic relationsAmerican Speech-Language-Hearing AssociationMedicinePsychologyNursingInternet privacyPolitical scienceLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

You have accessThe ASHA LeaderFrom the President1 Nov 2011Our Role in Effective Patient-Provider Communication Paul R. RaoPhD, CCC-SLP Paul R. Rao Google Scholar More articles by this author , PhD, CCC-SLP https://doi.org/10.1044/leader.FTP.16132011.17 SectionsAbout ToolsAdd to favorites ShareFacebookTwitterLinked In http://www.asha.org/Publications/leader/2011/111101/From-the-President--Our-Role-in-Effective-Patient-Provider-Communication.htm Effective communication between patients and providers is increasingly recognized as an important risk-management issue, cost-containment factor, and essential component of quality health care and patient safety. Change to our health care system is a constant, and ASHA is working hard to keep abreast of both the challenges and opportunities for our discipline. We all can appreciate the importance of health care advocacy, evidence-based practice, and ethics. This focus has recently led me to contemplate the role of speech-language pathologists, audiologists, and ASHA in promoting, implementing, and measuring the impact of effective patient-provider communication. No matter what your clinical setting, this message is for you. We are all health care consumers from time to time, and so are our clients. ASHA’s vision and mission statements mandate that we support the rights of all people to communicate. Therefore, when there is a widespread problem with communication, we ought to be talking about it and trying to lend a hand. I am advocating for action. Based on data from NIH and MarkeTrak VII, estimates of “communication-vulnerable individuals” in health care settings in the United States include 22 to 31 million people with hearing impairments and 46 million with “disordered communication,” as well as roughly 90 million people with limited health literacy, 40 million with limited English proficiency, and an unspecified number with cultural, sexual, and religious differences. That figure is more than two-thirds of the entire population. Importantly, research has demonstrated that effective communication between patients and providers increases the likelihood of (1) positive patient outcomes, (2) accurate diagnoses and timely treatments, (3) patients and family members understanding and adhering to recommended treatment regimens, (4) greatly improved patient safety, and (5) patient and family satisfaction with the care they receive (e.g., Ong, de Haes, Hoos, & Lammes, 1995; Rao, Anderson, Inui, & Frankel, 2007; Stewart, 1995). On the other hand, communication breakdowns among patients, their family members, and health care staff contribute to such serious problems as medical errors, inadequate pain relief, extended hospital stays, increased costs, and patient anguish and disorientation. Effective communication between patients and providers, therefore, is increasingly recognized as important. Some of our colleagues who provide augmentative communication services are already demonstrating the value of their services to a broad spectrum of patients in intensive care units and emergency rooms, and at bedsides. The need for improved communication between patients and providers creates a window of opportunity for ASHA and its members. As new federal laws, regulations, guidelines, and standards mandate improved patient-provider communication, the time is now to step up and advocate for our role. As communication experts, we bring skills in assessing, diagnosing, and treating communication disorders and in helping people communicate more effectively. In addition, we promote augmentative communication strategies and the elimination of societal, cultural, and linguistic barriers. We need to work collaboratively with our colleagues in interpreter services, nursing, medicine, allied health, dietary, emergency medicine, pharmacy, compliance, administration, and pastoral care. We have to demonstrate the value of our treatment procedures with outcome data as we hold paramount the welfare of our clients. I recommend Becky Sutherland Cornett’s article on health care reform and speech-pathology practice ( The ASHA Leader, Aug. 3, 2010). We also need to promote public understanding of the professions by supporting the development of services designed to fulfill the unmet needs of the public (Code of Ethics, Principles 1 and 3). ASHA works diligently through our Health Care Economics Committee to ensure that speech-language pathology and audiology services are appropriately valued and that procedure codes cover the services we provide. It is up to us to collect data to obtain reasonable reimbursement values from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. History strongly suggests that if we do the right thing, the money will eventually follow. We bring well-established, evidence-based practices, an understanding of communication processes, and a long history of working with other disciplines to any table. I have little doubt the reimbursement codes will follow, because the Health Care Economics Committee can advocate for new codes. Moreover, patients need to access communication supports 24/7. Effective patient-provider communication is a health care advocacy issue. Let’s apply our unique training and expertise to solving a national problem. ASHA’s Vision and Mission Statements ASHA vision statement: Making effective communication, a human right, accessible and achievable for all. ASHA mission statement: Empowering and supporting speech-language pathologists, audiologists, and speech, language, and hearing scientists by: Advocating on behalf of people with communication and related disorders. Advancing communication science. Promoting effective human communication. Clear Patient Communication Anyone entering the health care system should have services and tools available to allow them to communicate with health care professionals. People also have a right to receive information about their health and health care that is understandable, meaningful, and actionable. ASHA has resources available to help clinicians communicate more effectively with patients and families: Patient-Provider Communication Health Literacy Cultural Competence References Ong L. M., de Haes J. C., Hoos A. M., & Lammes F. B. (1995). Doctor-patient communication: A review of the literature.Social Science and Medicine, 40, 903–918. Google Scholar Rao J. K., Anderson L. A., Inui T. S., Frankel R. M. (2007). Communication interventions make a difference in conversations between physicians and patients: A systematic review of the evidence.Medical Care, 45(4), 340–349. Google Scholar Stewart M. A. (1995). Effective physician-patient communication and health outcomes: A review.Journal of the Canadian Medical Association, 152, 1423–1433. Google Scholar Author Notes PhD, CCC-SLP Advertising Disclaimer | Advertise With Us Advertising Disclaimer | Advertise With Us Additional Resources FiguresSourcesRelatedDetails Volume 16Issue 13November 2011 Get Permissions Add to your Mendeley library History Published in print: Nov 1, 2011 Metrics Downloaded 640 times Topicsasha-topicsleader_do_tagasha-article-typesCopyright & Permissions© 2011 American Speech-Language-Hearing AssociationLoading ...

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.040
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.131
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0400.131
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0110.015
Scholarly communication0.0260.021
Open science0.0030.017
Research integrity0.0160.029
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0870.066

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.

Opus teacher head0.248
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.165 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueASHA LeaderSame topicPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207