2010
DOI: 10.1016/s1098-3015(11)71881-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bi4 Are Second Opinions Objective? Biases in Second-Opinion Consultations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

1
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…11,12 Patients also seek a SO when they are dissatisfied with an impersonal communication or feel that their physician had not spent enough time with them, feel they did not get the information they need, or lack trust in the physician. 4,11,[13][14][15][17][18][19][20][21][22] Despite the importance of the SO tool, only a few studies evaluated how many patients seek SOs, 23 and they are limited to self-report surveys in particular patient groups (e.g., cancer patients). We were aware of only one survey that estimated SO utilization in a general population, conducted in the US in 1994, where 18.8% of the respondents received a SO.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…11,12 Patients also seek a SO when they are dissatisfied with an impersonal communication or feel that their physician had not spent enough time with them, feel they did not get the information they need, or lack trust in the physician. 4,11,[13][14][15][17][18][19][20][21][22] Despite the importance of the SO tool, only a few studies evaluated how many patients seek SOs, 23 and they are limited to self-report surveys in particular patient groups (e.g., cancer patients). We were aware of only one survey that estimated SO utilization in a general population, conducted in the US in 1994, where 18.8% of the respondents received a SO.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%