此页面是自动翻译的,不保证翻译的准确性。请参阅 英文版 对于源文本。

Effect of Physician Race and Gender on Simulated Patients' Ratings

2020年7月18日 更新者:Yale University

Effect of Physician Race and Gender on Simulated Patients' Ratings and Confidence in Their Physicians: A Randomized Trial

The purpose of the study was to determine whether the race and gender of a simulated doctor affected analog patients' reported confidence and satisfaction in the simulated doctor's diagnosis and treatment plan. The study used two randomized patient analog experiments.

This study is complete and pre-analysis plans (PAPs) for each experiment were published prior to data collection. The PAPs are available at: http://aspredicted.org/blind.php?x=43xj25 (Study 1) and https://aspredicted.org/blind.php?x=369st7 (Study 2).

研究概览

详细说明

Prior literature is unclear on whether patients display bias in their evaluations of physicians based on their race or gender. The investigators estimated the effects of physician race and gender using an online clinical vignette. Participants played the role of analog patients reporting to the Emergency Department (ED) with symptoms consistent with gastroenteritis. Participants were provided with a diagnosis of gastroenteritis by a simulated ED physician. The race (black or white) and gender (male or female) of the simulated physician was randomly assigned in a 2x2 factorial experiment. Simulated physicians provided a diagnosis of gastroenteritis and contradicted by an Online Symptom Checker. Following the physician's diagnosis and contradiction by the Online Symptom Checker, participants rated the simulated physician on survey measures of satisfaction and confidence in both the treatment plan and diagnosis. The main (null) hypothesis tested was that there were no differences across the four treatment arms (Black Female, Black Male, White Female, White Male). Participants for the first experiment (Study 1) were recruited from Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) and participants for the second experiment (Study 2) were recruited from Lucid.

Primary Aim: To determine whether the race and gender of a simulated physician had a causal effect on participants' confidence and satisfaction in the physician's diagnosis and treatment plan in an ED setting.

Exploratory Aims: To determine whether the race and gender of a simulated physician had a casual effect on participants' perceptions of the warmth and competence of the physician, their willingness to sue or complain about the physician for an incorrect diagnosis, and their perceived fairness of the charge for the visit.

研究类型

介入性

注册 (实际的)

3592

阶段

  • 不适用

联系人和位置

本节提供了进行研究的人员的详细联系信息,以及有关进行该研究的地点的信息。

学习地点

    • Connecticut
      • New Haven、Connecticut、美国、06520
        • Yale University

参与标准

研究人员寻找符合特定描述的人,称为资格标准。这些标准的一些例子是一个人的一般健康状况或先前的治疗。

资格标准

适合学习的年龄

18年 及以上 (成人、年长者)

接受健康志愿者

是的

有资格学习的性别

全部

描述

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Adults over 18 years old

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Participants who reported current pregnancy
  • Participants who reported a current or prior diagnosis of cancer
  • Participants who reported a history of abdominal surgery

学习计划

本节提供研究计划的详细信息,包括研究的设计方式和研究的衡量标准。

研究是如何设计的?

设计细节

  • 主要用途:卫生服务研究
  • 分配:随机化
  • 介入模型:阶乘赋值
  • 屏蔽:无(打开标签)

武器和干预

参与者组/臂
干预/治疗
实验性的:Simulated Black Male Physician
Participants are randomized to view the clinical vignette with a simulated Black Male physician.
Participants in this arm of the experiment viewed one of 10 randomly selected possible images of a simulated Black Male physician. This image was paired with a written treatment and diagnosis of gastroenteritis alongside a contradictory diagnosis and treatment plan for appendicitis from an Online Symptom Checker.
实验性的:Simulated Black Female Physician
Participants are randomized to view the clinical vignette with a simulated Black Female physician.
Participants in this arm of the experiment viewed one of 10 randomly selected possible images of a simulated Black Female physician. This image was paired with a written treatment and diagnosis of gastroenteritis alongside a contradictory diagnosis and treatment plan for appendicitis from an Online Symptom Checker.
实验性的:Simulated White Male Physician
Participants are randomized to view the clinical vignette with a simulated White Male physician.
Participants in this arm of the experiment viewed one of 10 randomly selected possible images of a simulated White Male physician. This image was paired with a written treatment and diagnosis of gastroenteritis alongside a contradictory diagnosis and treatment plan for appendicitis from an Online Symptom Checker.
实验性的:Simulated White Female Physician
Participants are randomized to view the clinical vignette with a simulated White Female physician.
Participants in this arm of the experiment viewed one of 10 randomly selected possible images of a simulated White Female physician. This image was paired with a written treatment and diagnosis of gastroenteritis alongside a contradictory diagnosis and treatment plan for appendicitis from an Online Symptom Checker.

研究衡量的是什么?

主要结果指标

结果测量
措施说明
大体时间
Patient Confidence
大体时间:Approximately 10 minutes
  1. "How confident are you that this doctor made the correct diagnosis?" Study 1: [not at all confident (0) to completely confident (100)] Study 2: [not at all confident (1) to completely confident (5)]*
  2. "How confident are you that this doctor made the correct treatment plan?" Study 1: [not at all confident (0) to completely confident (100)] Study 2: [not at all confident (1) to completely confident (5)]*

    • The Patient Confidence outcome for each study participant was the unweighted average of their ratings on questions a and b. In Study 1, this item was measured using 0-100 point scales. In Study 2, this outcome was measured using 5 point scales. For all analyses, these Patient Confidence outcomes from a and b were rescaled to match the 1-5 point range from Study 2.
Approximately 10 minutes
Believed Symptom Checker over Doctor
大体时间:Approximately 10 minutes
"Which diagnosis do you think is more likely to be correct?" [the doctor's diagnosis (0); online symptom checker (1)]
Approximately 10 minutes
Likelihood of Requesting more Tests
大体时间:Approximately 10 minutes
"Would you ask the doctor to perform additional diagnostic tests? (Such as the CT scan recommended by the Symptom Checker)." [definitely not (1); probably not (2); might or might not (3); probably (4); definitely (5)]
Approximately 10 minutes
Patient Satisfaction: scale
大体时间:Approximately 10 minutes

"What number would you use to rate your care during this emergency room visit?" Study 1: [0 (worse possible care) to 100 (best possible care)] Study 2: [0 (worse possible care) to 10 (best possible care)]*

*In Study 1, the Patient Satisfaction was measured using a 0-100 point scale. In Study 2, this was measured using a 10 point scale. For all analyses, this Patient Satisfaction outcome from Study 1 was rescaled to match the 0-10 point range in Study 2.

Approximately 10 minutes
Likelihood to Recommend
大体时间:Approximately 10 minutes
"Would you recommend this doctor to your friends and family?" [definitely not (1); probably not (2); might or might not (3); probably (4); definitely (5)]
Approximately 10 minutes

次要结果测量

结果测量
措施说明
大体时间
Warmth and Competence
大体时间:Approximately 10 minutes
  1. Study 1: "How do you imagine this doctor would be in a real interaction?". 7-item scale: Tolerant, Warm, Sincere, Good-natured, Intelligent, Competent, Confident.
  2. Study 2: "Based on the doctor's diagnosis, to what extent do you find [him/her]". 6-item scale: Kind, Qualified, Intelligent, Competent, Open-minded, Trustworthy.

    • Warmth and Competence were measured in Study 1 (7-item scale) and Study 2 (6-item scale).
Approximately 10 minutes
Willingness to sue or complain
大体时间:Approximately 10 minutes

"You take the doctor's advice and go home. Over the next few days, the pain in your abdomen got worse and you returned to the hospital where you were diagnosed with appendicitis. Your appendix had burst and you developed a serious infection. This required emergency surgery and an extended stay in the hospital's intensive Care Unit"*

  1. "Would you file a complaint against this doctor?" [5 = "Definitely"; 4 = "Probably"; 3 = "Might or might not"; 2 = "Probably not"; 1 = "Definitely not"]
  2. "Would you consider suing this doctors?" [5 = "Definitely"; 4 = "Probably"; 3 = "Might or might not"; 2 = "Probably not"; 1 = "Definitely not"]

    • Willingness to sue or complain was only measured in Study 2.
Approximately 10 minutes
Fairness of the cost
大体时间:Approximately 10 minutes

"You would be charged about $350 for this emergency department visit. How fair do you think this charge is?" [0 = "Completely unfair" to 100 = "Completely Fair"]*

*Fairness of the cost was only measured in Study 1.

Approximately 10 minutes

合作者和调查者

在这里您可以找到参与这项研究的人员和组织。

出版物和有用的链接

负责输入研究信息的人员自愿提供这些出版物。这些可能与研究有关。

研究记录日期

这些日期跟踪向 ClinicalTrials.gov 提交研究记录和摘要结果的进度。研究记录和报告的结果由国家医学图书馆 (NLM) 审查,以确保它们在发布到公共网站之前符合特定的质量控制标准。

研究主要日期

学习开始 (实际的)

2018年3月9日

初级完成 (实际的)

2018年7月31日

研究完成 (实际的)

2018年7月31日

研究注册日期

首次提交

2019年11月18日

首先提交符合 QC 标准的

2019年12月5日

首次发布 (实际的)

2019年12月9日

研究记录更新

最后更新发布 (实际的)

2020年7月21日

上次提交的符合 QC 标准的更新

2020年7月18日

最后验证

2020年7月1日

更多信息

与本研究相关的术语

其他研究编号

  • 2000022317
  • 12916 (AsPredicted.org)
  • 9068 (其他标识符:AsPredicted.org)

计划个人参与者数据 (IPD)

计划共享个人参与者数据 (IPD)?

是的

IPD 计划说明

We will make the data available upon individual request.

IPD 共享时间框架

All data and replication code will be posted on an open-source website after the manuscript is accepted.

IPD 共享访问标准

We have no restrictions on access. All data and replication code will be posted on an open-source website after the manuscript is accepted.

IPD 共享支持信息类型

  • 研究方案
  • 树液
  • 国际碳纤维联合会
  • 分析代码

药物和器械信息、研究文件

研究美国 FDA 监管的药品

不

研究美国 FDA 监管的设备产品

不

此信息直接从 clinicaltrials.gov 网站检索,没有任何更改。如果您有任何更改、删除或更新研究详细信息的请求,请联系 register@clinicaltrials.gov. clinicaltrials.gov 上实施更改,我们的网站上也会自动更新.

订阅