Nina Gobat1, Paul Kinnersley2, John W Gregory3, Michael Robling4. 1. Cochrane Institute of Primary Care and Public Health, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK. Electronic address: GobatNH@cardiff.ac.uk. 2. Institute of Medical Education, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK. Electronic address: Kinnersley@cardiff.ac.uk. 3. Institute of Molecular and Experimental Medicine, School of Medicine, Cardiff, UK. Electronic address: GregoryJW@cardiff.ac.uk. 4. South East Wales Trials Unit, Institute of Translation Innovation Methodology and Engagement, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK. Electronic address: RoblingMR@cardiff.ac.uk.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To establish consensus on the core domains of agenda setting in consultations. METHODS: We reviewed the healthcare literature and, using a modified Delphi technique to embrace both patient and clinician perspectives, conducted an iterative online survey, with 30 experts in health communication. Participants described agenda setting and rated the importance of proposed domains. Consensus was determined where the group median was ≥5 on a 7-point Likert-like response scale, and the interquartile range fell to within one point on this scale. RESULTS: Relevant publications were identified in three overlapping bodies of healthcare literature. Survey respondents considered that agenda setting involved a process whereby patients and clinicians establish a joint focus for both their conversation and their working relationship. Consensus was obtained on six core domains: identifying patient talk topics, identifying clinician talk topics, agreement of shared priorities, establishing conversational focus, collaboration and engagement. New terminology--agenda mapping and agenda navigation--is proposed. CONCLUSION: We identified core agenda setting domains that embraced patient and clinician perspectives. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: An integrated conceptualization of agenda setting may now be used by researchers and educators in both clinician and patient focused interventions.
OBJECTIVE: To establish consensus on the core domains of agenda setting in consultations. METHODS: We reviewed the healthcare literature and, using a modified Delphi technique to embrace both patient and clinician perspectives, conducted an iterative online survey, with 30 experts in health communication. Participants described agenda setting and rated the importance of proposed domains. Consensus was determined where the group median was ≥5 on a 7-point Likert-like response scale, and the interquartile range fell to within one point on this scale. RESULTS: Relevant publications were identified in three overlapping bodies of healthcare literature. Survey respondents considered that agenda setting involved a process whereby patients and clinicians establish a joint focus for both their conversation and their working relationship. Consensus was obtained on six core domains: identifying patient talk topics, identifying clinician talk topics, agreement of shared priorities, establishing conversational focus, collaboration and engagement. New terminology--agenda mapping and agenda navigation--is proposed. CONCLUSION: We identified core agenda setting domains that embraced patient and clinician perspectives. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: An integrated conceptualization of agenda setting may now be used by researchers and educators in both clinician and patient focused interventions.
Authors: Jennifer L Wolff; Debra L Roter; Cynthia M Boyd; David L Roth; Diane M Echavarria; Jennifer Aufill; Judith B Vick; Laura N Gitlin Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-07-18 Impact factor: 5.128
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
Authors: Naykky Singh Ospina; Kari A Phillips; Rene Rodriguez-Gutierrez; Ana Castaneda-Guarderas; Michael R Gionfriddo; Megan E Branda; Victor M Montori Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-07-02 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Ariel R Green; Cynthia M Boyd; Kathy S Gleason; Leslie Wright; Courtney R Kraus; Ruth Bedoy; Bianca Sanchez; Jonathan Norton; Orla C Sheehan; Jennifer L Wolff; Emily Reeve; Matthew L Maciejewski; Linda A Weffald; Elizabeth A Bayliss Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2020-07-29 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Angus G K McNair; Robert N Whistance; Barry Main; Rachael Forsythe; Rhiannon Macefield; Jonathan Rees; Anne Pullyblank; Kerry Avery; Sara Brookes; Michael G Thomas; Paul A Sylvester; Ann Russell; Alfred Oliver; Dion Morton; Robin Kennedy; David Jayne; Richard Huxtable; Roland Hackett; Susan Dutton; Mark G Coleman; Mia Card; Julia Brown; Jane Blazeby Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-11-14 Impact factor: 2.692