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

Roberto Burro, Ugo Savardi, Maria Antonietta Annunziata, Paolo De Paoli, Ivana Bianchi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: 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. Purpose: 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)? Methods: Two questionnaires were created and used, one presenting the information in terms of opposites (ie, bipolar communication) and another using unipolar communication. Results: 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. Limitations: 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. Conclusion: The encouraging results imply that further testing of the use of opposites in informed consent forms and in doctor-patient communication is strongly advisable.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)443-459
Number of pages17
JournalPatient Preference and Adherence
Volume12
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Communication
communication
Consent Forms
speaking
diagnostic
Emotions
Language
Clinical Trials
commitment
organization
questionnaire
language

Keywords

  • Bipolar
  • Doctor-patient communication
  • Informed consent
  • Opposites
  • Satisfaction
  • Understanding
  • Unipolar

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine (miscellaneous)
  • Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics (miscellaneous)
  • Health Policy

Cite this

The effects of presenting oncologic information in terms of opposites in a medical context. / Burro, Roberto; Savardi, Ugo; Annunziata, Maria Antonietta; De Paoli, Paolo; Bianchi, Ivana.

In: Patient Preference and Adherence, Vol. 12, 01.01.2018, p. 443-459.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{5f14802053ea44f98fc099deed5d8d45,
title = "The effects of presenting oncologic information in terms of opposites in a medical context",
abstract = "Background: 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. Purpose: 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)? Methods: Two questionnaires were created and used, one presenting the information in terms of opposites (ie, bipolar communication) and another using unipolar communication. Results: 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. Limitations: 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. Conclusion: The encouraging results imply that further testing of the use of opposites in informed consent forms and in doctor-patient communication is strongly advisable.",
keywords = "Bipolar, Doctor-patient communication, Informed consent, Opposites, Satisfaction, Understanding, Unipolar",
author = "Roberto Burro and Ugo Savardi and Annunziata, {Maria Antonietta} and {De Paoli}, Paolo and Ivana Bianchi",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.2147/PPA.S147091",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
pages = "443--459",
journal = "Patient Preference and Adherence",
issn = "1177-889X",
publisher = "Dove Medical Press Ltd.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The effects of presenting oncologic information in terms of opposites in a medical context

AU - Burro, Roberto

AU - Savardi, Ugo

AU - Annunziata, Maria Antonietta

AU - De Paoli, Paolo

AU - Bianchi, Ivana

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Background: 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. Purpose: 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)? Methods: Two questionnaires were created and used, one presenting the information in terms of opposites (ie, bipolar communication) and another using unipolar communication. Results: 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. Limitations: 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. Conclusion: The encouraging results imply that further testing of the use of opposites in informed consent forms and in doctor-patient communication is strongly advisable.

AB - Background: 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. Purpose: 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)? Methods: Two questionnaires were created and used, one presenting the information in terms of opposites (ie, bipolar communication) and another using unipolar communication. Results: 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. Limitations: 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. Conclusion: The encouraging results imply that further testing of the use of opposites in informed consent forms and in doctor-patient communication is strongly advisable.

KW - Bipolar

KW - Doctor-patient communication

KW - Informed consent

KW - Opposites

KW - Satisfaction

KW - Understanding

KW - Unipolar

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044569264&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85044569264&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2147/PPA.S147091

DO - 10.2147/PPA.S147091

M3 - Article

VL - 12

SP - 443

EP - 459

JO - Patient Preference and Adherence

JF - Patient Preference and Adherence

SN - 1177-889X

ER -