Literature DB >> 15210639

Effect of patient socioeconomic status on perceptions of first- and second-year medical students.

James K H Woo1, Sahar H Ghorayeb, Cheong K Lee, Harpreet Sangha, Suzanne Richter.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Physician decision-making and perceptions of patients are affected by a patient's socioeconomic status (SES). We sought to determine if the perceptions of first- and second-year medical students are similarly affected. We also wanted to determine whether a student's own SES affects his or her perceptions of patients from a low or high SES background.
METHODS: Two similar videos of a physician-patient interview were created. One video featured a patient of apparently high SES and the other featured a patient of apparently low SES. Differences in SES were portrayed by means of clothing, accessories and dialogue. First- and second-year medical students at the University of Western Ontario were recruited to view 1 of the videos and to answer a questionnaire using a 5-point Likert scale.
RESULTS: Responses were obtained from 205 (89%) of the 231 medical students invited to participate. Respondents' perceptions of the low SES and high SES patients were significantly different in the following respects. The low SES patient was perceived to be less compliant in taking medications and less likely to return for follow-up visits; was perceived to have a lower level of social support, poorer overall health and a worse prognosis; and was perceived to be more adversely affected in his occupational duties by illness (p < 0.05). Furthermore, second-year students who watched the video with the low SES patient were less inclined to want that patient in their practice than second-year students who watched the video with the high SES patient (p = 0.032). One hundred and six students (52%) were categorized as having high SES and 37 (18%) as having low SES (the remaining students were categorized as having mid-level SES). Among students who watched the video with the low SES patient, the level of agreement with the statement "This person is the kind of patient I would like to have in my practice" was greater among low SES students than among high SES students (p = 0.012).
INTERPRETATION: First- and second-year medical students have negative perceptions of low SES patients on several dimensions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; Professional Patient Relationship

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15210639      PMCID: PMC421718          DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.1031474

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  CMAJ        ISSN: 0820-3946            Impact factor:   8.262


  17 in total

1.  Physical activity behaviors in lower and higher socioeconomic status populations.

Authors:  E S Ford; R K Merritt; G W Heath; K E Powell; R A Washburn; A Kriska; G Haile
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1991-06-15       Impact factor: 4.897

2.  Identification of neonatal hearing impairment: recruitment and follow-up.

Authors:  R C Folsom; J E Widen; B R Vohr; B Cone-Wesson; M P Gorga; Y S Sininger; S J Norton
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 3.570

3.  Is general practitioner decision making associated with patient socio-economic status?

Authors:  A Scott; A Shiell; M King
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 4.634

4.  Compliance with diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis immunisation in Bangladesh: factors identifying high risk groups.

Authors:  S Zeitlyn; A K Rahman; B H Nielsen; M Gomes; P E Kofoed; D Mahalanabis
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1992-03-07

5.  Physician service to the underserved: implications for affirmative action in medical education.

Authors:  J C Cantor; E L Miles; L C Baker; D C Barker
Journal:  Inquiry       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 1.730

6.  Barriers to follow-up of abnormal Papanicolaou smears in an urban community health center.

Authors:  M D McKee; J Lurio; P Marantz; W Burton; M Mulvihill
Journal:  Arch Fam Med       Date:  1999 Mar-Apr

7.  Educational attainment and behavioral and biologic risk factors for coronary heart disease in middle-aged women.

Authors:  K A Matthews; S F Kelsey; E N Meilahn; L H Kuller; R R Wing
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 4.897

8.  Socioeconomic disparities in preventive care persist despite universal coverage. Breast and cervical cancer screening in Ontario and the United States.

Authors:  S J Katz; T P Hofer
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1994-08-17       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Psychosocial factors in the natural history of physical activity.

Authors:  G A Kaplan; N B Lazarus; R D Cohen; D J Leu
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  1991 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 5.043

10.  An analysis of social and economic factors associated with followup of patients with vesicoureteral reflux.

Authors:  J Wan; S P Greenfield; M Talley; M Ng
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 7.450

View more
  9 in total

1.  A call for video images: medicine in real time.

Authors:  Eric Wooltorton
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2004-06-22       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Recommendations for intrauterine contraception: a randomized trial of the effects of patients' race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status.

Authors:  Christine Dehlendorf; Rachel Ruskin; Kevin Grumbach; Eric Vittinghoff; Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo; Dean Schillinger; Jody Steinauer
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2010-07-02       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 3.  Disparities in family planning.

Authors:  Christine Dehlendorf; Maria Isabel Rodriguez; Kira Levy; Sonya Borrero; Jody Steinauer
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 8.661

4.  Economic factors in of patients' nonadherence to antidepressant treatment.

Authors:  Haekyung Jeon-Slaughter
Journal:  Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol       Date:  2012-03-14       Impact factor: 4.328

5.  A randomized controlled trial testing a virtual perspective-taking intervention to reduce race and socioeconomic status disparities in pain care.

Authors:  Adam T Hirsh; Megan M Miller; Nicole A Hollingshead; Tracy Anastas; Stephanie T Carnell; Benjamin C Lok; Chenghao Chu; Ying Zhang; Michael E Robinson; Kurt Kroenke; Leslie Ashburn-Nardo
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 7.926

6.  How Socioeconomic Status Affects Patient Perceptions of Health Care: A Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Nicholas C Arpey; Anne H Gaglioti; Marcy E Rosenbaum
Journal:  J Prim Care Community Health       Date:  2017-03-08

7.  An ethnography of chronic pain management in primary care: The social organization of physicians' work in the midst of the opioid crisis.

Authors:  Fiona Webster; Kathleen Rice; Joel Katz; Onil Bhattacharyya; Craig Dale; Ross Upshur
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-05-01       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Assessment of Patient Knowledge Level Towards MRI Safety Before the Scanning in Saudi Arabia.

Authors:  Dhafer M Alahmari; Fahad M Alsahli; Sami A Alghamdi; Othman I Alomair; Abdulrahman Alghamdi; Mohammed J Alsaadi
Journal:  Int J Gen Med       Date:  2022-07-28

9.  Better access to outpatient magnetic resonance imaging in Ontario - But for whom?

Authors:  John J You; Vikram Venkatesh; Andreas Laupacis
Journal:  Open Med       Date:  2009-03-03
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.