Literature DB >> 11932122

Analyzing medical dialogues: strength and weakness of Roter's interaction analysis system (RIAS).

Margareth Sandvik1, Hilde Eide, Marianne Lind, Peter K Graugaard, Jorun Torper, Arnstein Finset.   

Abstract

Roter's interaction analysis system (RIAS) is analyzed in this article. Ground rules of linguistic interaction analysis, emphasizing meaning as a product of interaction and turn taking as a basic principle for the understanding of interaction are briefly introduced. Specific aspects of the application of RIAS are discussed and a number of adjustments and/or specifications suggested: (1) utterances should be defined in terms of content and turn taking criteria; (2) the recording system should allow for registering interruptions; (3) pauses or silences should be scored on the basis of functional criteria and not as demarcation in the communication; (4) clear distinctions should be made between the categories of "backchannel" and "agree"; (5) questions should be coded according to function rather than linguistic form; (6) some of the socioemotional categories may appear too narrow, others too wide; (7) crying should be included in the coding scheme as a separate category.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11932122     DOI: 10.1016/s0738-3991(02)00014-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Patient Educ Couns        ISSN: 0738-3991


  12 in total

1.  Genetic counseling communication with an African American BRCA1 kindred.

Authors:  Lee Ellington; Amiee Maxwel; Bonnie J Baty; Debra Roter; William N Dudley; Anita Y Kinney
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2006-11-01       Impact factor: 4.634

2.  Interactive and evaluative correlates of dialogue sequence: a simulation study applying the RIAS to turn taking structures.

Authors:  Debra L Roter; Susan M Larson; Mary Catherine Beach; Lisa A Cooper
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2008-02-21

3.  Verbal and non-verbal behaviour and patient perception of communication in primary care: an observational study.

Authors:  Paul Little; Peter White; Joanne Kelly; Hazel Everitt; Shkelzen Gashi; Annemieke Bikker; Stewart Mercer
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  What circumstances prompt a workplace discussion in medical evaluations for back pain?

Authors:  William S Shaw; Edward H Chin; Candace C Nelson; Silje Endresen Reme; Mary J Woiszwillo; Santosh K Verma
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2013-03

5.  Correlates of observer-rated active involvement in psychiatric treatment visits.

Authors:  Kelsey A Bonfils; Lauren Luther; Sadaaki Fukui; Erin L Adams; Kimberly C Dreison; Ruth L Firmin; Michelle P Salyers
Journal:  Psychiatry Res       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 3.222

6.  Do community pharmacists actively engage elderly patients in the dialogue? Results from pharmaceutical care consultations.

Authors:  João Pelicano-Romano; Mariana R Neves; Ana Amado; Afonso M Cavaco
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-12-17       Impact factor: 3.377

7.  Using a computer simulation for teaching communication skills: A blinded multisite mixed methods randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Frederick W Kron; Michael D Fetters; Mark W Scerbo; Casey B White; Monica L Lypson; Miguel A Padilla; Gayle A Gliva-McConvey; Lee A Belfore; Temple West; Amelia M Wallace; Timothy C Guetterman; Lauren S Schleicher; Rebecca A Kennedy; Rajesh S Mangrulkar; James F Cleary; Stacy C Marsella; Daniel M Becker
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2016-10-29

8.  Visualising conversation structure across time: insights into effective doctor-patient consultations.

Authors:  Daniel Angus; Bernadette Watson; Andrew Smith; Cindy Gallois; Janet Wiles
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-06-05       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Discussing Goals of Care With Families Using the Four Steps.

Authors:  Ramy Sedhom; David Barile
Journal:  Gerontol Geriatr Med       Date:  2016-08-21

10.  Exploring the influence of cultural orientations on assessment of communication behaviours during patient-practitioner interactions.

Authors:  Kyle J Wilby; Marjan J B Govaerts; Zubin Austin; Diana H J M Dolmans
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2017-03-21       Impact factor: 2.463

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.