BACKGROUND: We previously reported that doctor-patient communication in the cancer context may be suboptimal. We therefore developed measures to assess patient communication preferences and established feasibility of an Internet-based intervention to improve communication. METHODS: Cancer patients completed an Internet-based survey about communication preferences, with a summary provided to the physician before the consultation. Patients completed a follow-up survey to assess consultation content and satisfaction. RESULTS: Study procedures were feasible, measures exhibited strong internal consistency, and patients expressed satisfaction with the intervention. CONCLUSION: The Internet offers an opportunity to assess patient preferences and prompt physicians about individual patient informational needs prior to the clinical encounter.
BACKGROUND: We previously reported that doctor-patient communication in the cancer context may be suboptimal. We therefore developed measures to assess patient communication preferences and established feasibility of an Internet-based intervention to improve communication. METHODS:Cancerpatients completed an Internet-based survey about communication preferences, with a summary provided to the physician before the consultation. Patients completed a follow-up survey to assess consultation content and satisfaction. RESULTS: Study procedures were feasible, measures exhibited strong internal consistency, and patients expressed satisfaction with the intervention. CONCLUSION: The Internet offers an opportunity to assess patient preferences and prompt physicians about individual patient informational needs prior to the clinical encounter.
Authors: Suzanne M Miller; Deborah J Bowen; Marci K Campbell; Michael A Diefenbach; Ellen R Gritz; Paul B Jacobsen; Michael Stefanek; Carolyn Y Fang; DeAnn Lazovich; Kerry A Sherman; Catharine Wang Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: J D Cheng; J Hitt; B Koczwara; K A Schulman; C B Burnett; D J Gaskin; J H Rowland; N J Meropol Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2000-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Wenchi Liang; Caroline B Burnett; Julia H Rowland; Neal J Meropol; Lynne Eggert; Yi-Ting Hwang; Rebecca A Silliman; Jane C Weeks; Jeanne S Mandelblatt Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-02-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Neal J Meropol; Brian L Egleston; Joanne S Buzaglo; Al B Benson; Donald J Cegala; Michael A Diefenbach; Linda Fleisher; Suzanne M Miller; Daniel P Sulmasy; Kevin P Weinfurt Journal: Cancer Date: 2008-12-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Neal J Meropol; Brian L Egleston; Joanne S Buzaglo; Andrew Balshem; Al B Benson; Donald J Cegala; Roger B Cohen; Michael Collins; Michael A Diefenbach; Suzanne M Miller; Linda Fleisher; Jennifer L Millard; Eric A Ross; Kevin A Schulman; Allison Silver; Elyse Slater; Nicholas Solarino; Daniel P Sulmasy; Jonathan Trinastic; Kevin P Weinfurt Journal: Cancer Date: 2013-01-18 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Kirsten F L Douma; Caro C E Koning; Linda C Zandbelt; Hanneke C J M de Haes; Ellen M A Smets Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2011-11-13 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Monika Alise Johansen; Eva Henriksen; Alexander Horsch; Tibor Schuster; Gro K Rosvold Berntsen Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2012-10-03 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Monika Alise Johansen; Gro K Rosvold Berntsen; Tibor Schuster; Eva Henriksen; Alexander Horsch Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2012-10-03 Impact factor: 5.428