PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 3878408

Sharing problem cards with patients.

P Tomson
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The problem cards of 100 patients in a group practice were shared and discussed with the patients concerned. The patients then completed a questionnaire recording their reactions to the experience. Although the sharing of problem cards can cause patients to become anxious and raises the questions of confidentiality, patients' rights and autonomy, the replies to the questionnaire demonstrate that patients valued seeing their problem lists. Sharing problem cards gave patients an opportunity to review their health needs and in some cases to correct inaccurate information although the lists of problems were found to be reasonably accurate.The results of this experiment show that sharing problem cards with patients has a beneficial effect on the accuracy of the records and could increase the trust between doctor and patient.

Explore related subjects

EnglandFamily PracticeHumansMedical RecordsMedical Records, Problem-OrientedPatient ParticipationJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

P Tomson. 1985. Sharing problem cards with patients.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3878408/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Health inequalities in Scotland and England: the contrasting journeys of ideas from research into policy.

Both the UK's Labour Government and Scotland's devolved Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition Executive have committed themselves to reducing health inequalities. Furthermore, both institutions have emphasised the importance of using evidence to inform policy responses. In light of such political commitments, a significant amount of work has been undertaken in the field of health inequalities in order to: (i) review the available research evidence; (ii) assess the extent to which policies have been based on this research evidence; and (iii) evaluate the success (or failure) of policies to tackle health inequalities. Yet so far only limited attention has been given to exploring how key actors involved in research-policy dialogues understand the processes involved. In an attempt to address this gap, this article draws on data from semi-structured interviews with 58 key actors in the field of health inequalities research and policymaking in the UK to argue that it is ideas, rather than research evidence, which have travelled from research into policy. The descriptions of the varying journeys of these ideas fit three types--successful, partial and fractured--each of which is outlined with reference to one example. The paper then employs existing theories about research-policy relations and the movement of ideas in an attempt to illuminate and better understand the contrasting journeys. In the concluding discussion, it is argued that the third approach, which focuses on the entrepreneurial processes involved in the marketing of ideas, is most helpful in understanding the research findings, but that this needs to be discussed in relation to the political context within which negotiations take place.

England↗