Loading…

The effects of presenting oncologic information in terms of opposites in a medical context

An extensive body of literature has demonstrated that many patients who have been asked to participate in clinical trials do not fully understand the informed consent forms. A parallel independent study has demonstrated that opposites have a special status in human cognitive organization: they are c...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Patient preference and adherence 2018-01, Vol.12, p.443-459
Main Authors: Burro, Roberto, Savardi, Ugo, Annunziata, Maria Antonietta, De Paoli, Paolo, Bianchi, Ivana
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c643t-cf510d5d7042d045d42a68eb7b609ba3fc182713f608b32c52f5c3f993246ae13
cites
container_end_page 459
container_issue
container_start_page 443
container_title Patient preference and adherence
container_volume 12
creator Burro, Roberto
Savardi, Ugo
Annunziata, Maria Antonietta
De Paoli, Paolo
Bianchi, Ivana
description An extensive body of literature has demonstrated that many patients who have been asked to participate in clinical trials do not fully understand the informed consent forms. A parallel independent study has demonstrated that opposites have a special status in human cognitive organization: they are common to all-natural languages and are intuitively and naturally understood and learnt. The study investigates whether, and how, the use of opposites impacts on doctor-patient communication: does using the terms "small-large" to describe a nodule (ie, bipolar communication) rather than speaking in terms of centimeters (ie, unipolar communication) affect a patient's understanding of the situation? And is it better to speak of "common-rare" side effects (ie, bipolar communication) instead of the number of people who have suffered from particular side effects (ie, unipolar communication)? Two questionnaires were created and used, one presenting the information in terms of opposites (ie, bipolar communication) and another using unipolar communication. The participants' perception of their situation (in terms of feeling healthy-ill, being at high-low risk, and their treatment requiring high-low commitment) varied in the two conditions. Moreover, self-reported levels of understanding and satisfaction with how the information was communicated were higher when opposites were used. Since this is the first study that addresses the merits of using bipolar structures versus unipolar structures in doctor-patient communication, further work is needed to consolidate and expand on the results, involving not only simulated but also real diagnostic contexts. The encouraging results imply that further testing of the use of opposites in informed consent forms and in doctor-patient communication is strongly advisable.
doi_str_mv 10.2147/PPA.S147091
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_1e3d6c9c628b42df8201aa3f6d1e9a5f</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A583381669</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_1e3d6c9c628b42df8201aa3f6d1e9a5f</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A583381669</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c643t-cf510d5d7042d045d42a68eb7b609ba3fc182713f608b32c52f5c3f993246ae13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkluL1DAUgIso7rr65LsUBBFkxlyaS1-EYfGysOCCK4gvIU1POlnapiYZ0X9vujMuHZBF8pDD6ZfvNCenKJ5jtCa4Em-vrjbrLzlANX5QnGIsxErK-tvDRXxSPInxBiFOOcGPixNScyIFE6fF9-stlGAtmBRLb8spQIQxubEr_Wh87ztnSjdaHwadnB9zXCYIwy3sp8lHlyDOWV0O0Dqj-9L4McGv9LR4ZHUf4dlhPyu-fnh_ff5pdfn548X55nJleEXTyliGUctagSrSooq1FdFcQiMajupGU2uwJAJTy5FsKDGMWGaorWtKKq4B07PiYu9tvb5RU3CDDr-V107dJnzolA7JmR4UBtpyU5t8-yZXs5IgrHMJ3mKoNbPZ9W7vmnZNvo7JrQi6P5IefxndVnX-p2JSiKqWWfD6IAj-xw5iUoOLBvpej-B3URFEaIUk4zSjL_dop_OvzT3ORjPjasMJwRwJwu6lmKRUYs7rTK3_QeXVwuDye4B1OX-k_a8DywqvFge2oPu0jb7fzUMRj833gkvjmz1ogo8xgL1rM0ZqnmyVJ1sdJjvTL5Yvc8f-HWX6B0l38F0</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2023408563</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The effects of presenting oncologic information in terms of opposites in a medical context</title><source>Taylor &amp; Francis Open Access</source><source>PubMed Central (PMC)</source><creator>Burro, Roberto ; Savardi, Ugo ; Annunziata, Maria Antonietta ; De Paoli, Paolo ; Bianchi, Ivana</creator><creatorcontrib>Burro, Roberto ; Savardi, Ugo ; Annunziata, Maria Antonietta ; De Paoli, Paolo ; Bianchi, Ivana</creatorcontrib><description>An extensive body of literature has demonstrated that many patients who have been asked to participate in clinical trials do not fully understand the informed consent forms. A parallel independent study has demonstrated that opposites have a special status in human cognitive organization: they are common to all-natural languages and are intuitively and naturally understood and learnt. The study investigates whether, and how, the use of opposites impacts on doctor-patient communication: does using the terms "small-large" to describe a nodule (ie, bipolar communication) rather than speaking in terms of centimeters (ie, unipolar communication) affect a patient's understanding of the situation? And is it better to speak of "common-rare" side effects (ie, bipolar communication) instead of the number of people who have suffered from particular side effects (ie, unipolar communication)? Two questionnaires were created and used, one presenting the information in terms of opposites (ie, bipolar communication) and another using unipolar communication. The participants' perception of their situation (in terms of feeling healthy-ill, being at high-low risk, and their treatment requiring high-low commitment) varied in the two conditions. Moreover, self-reported levels of understanding and satisfaction with how the information was communicated were higher when opposites were used. Since this is the first study that addresses the merits of using bipolar structures versus unipolar structures in doctor-patient communication, further work is needed to consolidate and expand on the results, involving not only simulated but also real diagnostic contexts. The encouraging results imply that further testing of the use of opposites in informed consent forms and in doctor-patient communication is strongly advisable.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1177-889X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1177-889X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S147091</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29628757</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New Zealand: Dove Medical Press Limited</publisher><subject>Analysis ; bipolar vs. unipolar communication ; Clinical trials ; doctor-patient communication ; Ethical aspects ; Informed consent ; oncologic information ; opposites ; Original Research ; Physician-patient relations ; Physicians ; self-reported understanding and satisfaction</subject><ispartof>Patient preference and adherence, 2018-01, Vol.12, p.443-459</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2018 Dove Medical Press Limited</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2020 Dove Medical Press Limited</rights><rights>2018 Burro et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited 2018</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c643t-cf510d5d7042d045d42a68eb7b609ba3fc182713f608b32c52f5c3f993246ae13</citedby><orcidid>0000-0002-5914-6042 ; 0000-0002-4491-2015 ; 0000-0001-9568-0368 ; 0000-0001-9374-2000</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5877498/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5877498/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,27922,27923,53789,53791</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29628757$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Burro, Roberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Savardi, Ugo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Annunziata, Maria Antonietta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Paoli, Paolo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bianchi, Ivana</creatorcontrib><title>The effects of presenting oncologic information in terms of opposites in a medical context</title><title>Patient preference and adherence</title><addtitle>Patient Prefer Adherence</addtitle><description>An extensive body of literature has demonstrated that many patients who have been asked to participate in clinical trials do not fully understand the informed consent forms. A parallel independent study has demonstrated that opposites have a special status in human cognitive organization: they are common to all-natural languages and are intuitively and naturally understood and learnt. The study investigates whether, and how, the use of opposites impacts on doctor-patient communication: does using the terms "small-large" to describe a nodule (ie, bipolar communication) rather than speaking in terms of centimeters (ie, unipolar communication) affect a patient's understanding of the situation? And is it better to speak of "common-rare" side effects (ie, bipolar communication) instead of the number of people who have suffered from particular side effects (ie, unipolar communication)? Two questionnaires were created and used, one presenting the information in terms of opposites (ie, bipolar communication) and another using unipolar communication. The participants' perception of their situation (in terms of feeling healthy-ill, being at high-low risk, and their treatment requiring high-low commitment) varied in the two conditions. Moreover, self-reported levels of understanding and satisfaction with how the information was communicated were higher when opposites were used. Since this is the first study that addresses the merits of using bipolar structures versus unipolar structures in doctor-patient communication, further work is needed to consolidate and expand on the results, involving not only simulated but also real diagnostic contexts. The encouraging results imply that further testing of the use of opposites in informed consent forms and in doctor-patient communication is strongly advisable.</description><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>bipolar vs. unipolar communication</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>doctor-patient communication</subject><subject>Ethical aspects</subject><subject>Informed consent</subject><subject>oncologic information</subject><subject>opposites</subject><subject>Original Research</subject><subject>Physician-patient relations</subject><subject>Physicians</subject><subject>self-reported understanding and satisfaction</subject><issn>1177-889X</issn><issn>1177-889X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkluL1DAUgIso7rr65LsUBBFkxlyaS1-EYfGysOCCK4gvIU1POlnapiYZ0X9vujMuHZBF8pDD6ZfvNCenKJ5jtCa4Em-vrjbrLzlANX5QnGIsxErK-tvDRXxSPInxBiFOOcGPixNScyIFE6fF9-stlGAtmBRLb8spQIQxubEr_Wh87ztnSjdaHwadnB9zXCYIwy3sp8lHlyDOWV0O0Dqj-9L4McGv9LR4ZHUf4dlhPyu-fnh_ff5pdfn548X55nJleEXTyliGUctagSrSooq1FdFcQiMajupGU2uwJAJTy5FsKDGMWGaorWtKKq4B07PiYu9tvb5RU3CDDr-V107dJnzolA7JmR4UBtpyU5t8-yZXs5IgrHMJ3mKoNbPZ9W7vmnZNvo7JrQi6P5IefxndVnX-p2JSiKqWWfD6IAj-xw5iUoOLBvpej-B3URFEaIUk4zSjL_dop_OvzT3ORjPjasMJwRwJwu6lmKRUYs7rTK3_QeXVwuDye4B1OX-k_a8DywqvFge2oPu0jb7fzUMRj833gkvjmz1ogo8xgL1rM0ZqnmyVJ1sdJjvTL5Yvc8f-HWX6B0l38F0</recordid><startdate>20180101</startdate><enddate>20180101</enddate><creator>Burro, Roberto</creator><creator>Savardi, Ugo</creator><creator>Annunziata, Maria Antonietta</creator><creator>De Paoli, Paolo</creator><creator>Bianchi, Ivana</creator><general>Dove Medical Press Limited</general><general>Dove Medical Press</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5914-6042</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4491-2015</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9568-0368</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9374-2000</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20180101</creationdate><title>The effects of presenting oncologic information in terms of opposites in a medical context</title><author>Burro, Roberto ; Savardi, Ugo ; Annunziata, Maria Antonietta ; De Paoli, Paolo ; Bianchi, Ivana</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c643t-cf510d5d7042d045d42a68eb7b609ba3fc182713f608b32c52f5c3f993246ae13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>bipolar vs. unipolar communication</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>doctor-patient communication</topic><topic>Ethical aspects</topic><topic>Informed consent</topic><topic>oncologic information</topic><topic>opposites</topic><topic>Original Research</topic><topic>Physician-patient relations</topic><topic>Physicians</topic><topic>self-reported understanding and satisfaction</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Burro, Roberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Savardi, Ugo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Annunziata, Maria Antonietta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Paoli, Paolo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bianchi, Ivana</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Patient preference and adherence</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Burro, Roberto</au><au>Savardi, Ugo</au><au>Annunziata, Maria Antonietta</au><au>De Paoli, Paolo</au><au>Bianchi, Ivana</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The effects of presenting oncologic information in terms of opposites in a medical context</atitle><jtitle>Patient preference and adherence</jtitle><addtitle>Patient Prefer Adherence</addtitle><date>2018-01-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>12</volume><spage>443</spage><epage>459</epage><pages>443-459</pages><issn>1177-889X</issn><eissn>1177-889X</eissn><abstract>An extensive body of literature has demonstrated that many patients who have been asked to participate in clinical trials do not fully understand the informed consent forms. A parallel independent study has demonstrated that opposites have a special status in human cognitive organization: they are common to all-natural languages and are intuitively and naturally understood and learnt. The study investigates whether, and how, the use of opposites impacts on doctor-patient communication: does using the terms "small-large" to describe a nodule (ie, bipolar communication) rather than speaking in terms of centimeters (ie, unipolar communication) affect a patient's understanding of the situation? And is it better to speak of "common-rare" side effects (ie, bipolar communication) instead of the number of people who have suffered from particular side effects (ie, unipolar communication)? Two questionnaires were created and used, one presenting the information in terms of opposites (ie, bipolar communication) and another using unipolar communication. The participants' perception of their situation (in terms of feeling healthy-ill, being at high-low risk, and their treatment requiring high-low commitment) varied in the two conditions. Moreover, self-reported levels of understanding and satisfaction with how the information was communicated were higher when opposites were used. Since this is the first study that addresses the merits of using bipolar structures versus unipolar structures in doctor-patient communication, further work is needed to consolidate and expand on the results, involving not only simulated but also real diagnostic contexts. The encouraging results imply that further testing of the use of opposites in informed consent forms and in doctor-patient communication is strongly advisable.</abstract><cop>New Zealand</cop><pub>Dove Medical Press Limited</pub><pmid>29628757</pmid><doi>10.2147/PPA.S147091</doi><tpages>17</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5914-6042</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4491-2015</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9568-0368</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9374-2000</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1177-889X
ispartof Patient preference and adherence, 2018-01, Vol.12, p.443-459
issn 1177-889X
1177-889X
language eng
recordid cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_1e3d6c9c628b42df8201aa3f6d1e9a5f
source Taylor & Francis Open Access; PubMed Central (PMC)
subjects Analysis
bipolar vs. unipolar communication
Clinical trials
doctor-patient communication
Ethical aspects
Informed consent
oncologic information
opposites
Original Research
Physician-patient relations
Physicians
self-reported understanding and satisfaction
title The effects of presenting oncologic information in terms of opposites in a medical context
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-14T12%3A19%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20effects%20of%20presenting%20oncologic%20information%20in%20terms%20of%20opposites%20in%20a%20medical%20context&rft.jtitle=Patient%20preference%20and%20adherence&rft.au=Burro,%20Roberto&rft.date=2018-01-01&rft.volume=12&rft.spage=443&rft.epage=459&rft.pages=443-459&rft.issn=1177-889X&rft.eissn=1177-889X&rft_id=info:doi/10.2147/PPA.S147091&rft_dat=%3Cgale_doaj_%3EA583381669%3C/gale_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c643t-cf510d5d7042d045d42a68eb7b609ba3fc182713f608b32c52f5c3f993246ae13%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2023408563&rft_id=info:pmid/29628757&rft_galeid=A583381669&rfr_iscdi=true