IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v70y2010i3p479-484.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Which patients improve: Characteristics increasing sensitivity to a supportive patient-practitioner relationship

Author

Listed:
  • Conboy, Lisa Ann
  • Macklin, Eric
  • Kelley, John
  • Kokkotou, Efi
  • Lembo, Anthony
  • Kaptchuk, Ted

Abstract

Supportive social relationships, including a positive patient-practitioner relationship, have been associated with positive health outcomes. Using the data from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) undertaken in the Boston area of the United States, this study sought to identify baseline factors predictive of patients' response to an experimentally applied supportive patient-practitioner relationship. To sort through the hundreds of potential attributes affecting the patient-practitioner relationship, we applied a false discovery rate method borrowed from the field of genomics and bioinformatics. To our knowledge such a method has not previously been applied to generate hypotheses from clinical trial data. In a previous RCT, our team investigated the effect of the patient-practitioner relationship on symptom improvement in patients with irritable Bowel syndrome (IBS). Data were collected on a sample of 289 individuals with IBS using a three-week, single blind, three arm, randomized controlled design. We found that a supportive patient-practitioner relationship significantly improved symptomatology and quality of life. A complex, multi-level measurement package was used to prospectively measure change and identify factors associated with improvement. Using a local false discovery rate procedure, we examined the association of 452 baseline subject variables with sensitivity to treatment. Out of 452 variables, only two baseline factors, reclusiveness, and previous trial experience increased sensitivity to the supportive patient-practitioner relationship. A third variable, additional opportunity during the study for subjects to discuss their illness through experiential interview, was associated with improved outcomes among subjects who did not receive the supportive patient-practitioner relationship. The few variables associated with differential benefit suggest that a patient-centered supportive patient-practitioner relationship may be beneficial for most patients. This may be especially important for reclusive individuals. Within the context of our study, additional study attention in the form of repeated experiential interviews compensated for a lack of positive patient-practitioner support. A supportive patient-practitioner relationship may also help overcome low provider expectations for subjects with previous trial experience. These results converge with the results of the parent trial, implicating the importance of the social world in healing.

Suggested Citation

  • Conboy, Lisa Ann & Macklin, Eric & Kelley, John & Kokkotou, Efi & Lembo, Anthony & Kaptchuk, Ted, 2010. "Which patients improve: Characteristics increasing sensitivity to a supportive patient-practitioner relationship," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 479-484, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:70:y:2010:i:3:p:479-484
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(09)00700-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Efron, Bradley, 2004. "Large-Scale Simultaneous Hypothesis Testing: The Choice of a Null Hypothesis," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 99, pages 96-104, January.
    2. Mumford, E. & Schlesinger, H.J. & Glass, G.V., 1982. "The effects of psychological intervention on recovery from surgery and heart attacks: An analysis of the literature," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 72(2), pages 141-151.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lee, Yin-Yang & Lin, Julia L., 2010. "Do patient autonomy preferences matter? Linking patient-centered care to patient-physician relationships and health outcomes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(10), pages 1811-1818, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pounds Stanley B. & Gao Cuilan L. & Zhang Hui, 2012. "Empirical Bayesian Selection of Hypothesis Testing Procedures for Analysis of Sequence Count Expression Data," Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, De Gruyter, vol. 11(5), pages 1-32, October.
    2. Shigeyuki Matsui & Hisashi Noma, 2011. "Estimating Effect Sizes of Differentially Expressed Genes for Power and Sample-Size Assessments in Microarray Experiments," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 67(4), pages 1225-1235, December.
    3. Won, Joong-Ho & Lim, Johan & Yu, Donghyeon & Kim, Byung Soo & Kim, Kyunga, 2014. "Monotone false discovery rate," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 86-93.
    4. van Wieringen, Wessel N. & Stam, Koen A. & Peeters, Carel F.W. & van de Wiel, Mark A., 2020. "Updating of the Gaussian graphical model through targeted penalized estimation," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    5. Ian W. McKeague & Min Qian, 2015. "An Adaptive Resampling Test for Detecting the Presence of Significant Predictors," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 110(512), pages 1422-1433, December.
    6. Angela Schörgendorfer & Adam J. Branscum & Timothy E. Hanson, 2013. "A Bayesian Goodness of Fit Test and Semiparametric Generalization of Logistic Regression with Measurement Data," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 69(2), pages 508-519, June.
    7. Han, Bing & Dalal, Siddhartha R., 2012. "A Bernstein-type estimator for decreasing density with application to p-value adjustments," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 427-437.
    8. Dalia Valencia & Rosa E. Lillo & Juan Romo, 2019. "A Kendall correlation coefficient between functional data," Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, Springer;German Classification Society - Gesellschaft für Klassifikation (GfKl);Japanese Classification Society (JCS);Classification and Data Analysis Group of the Italian Statistical Society (CLADAG);International Federation of Classification Societies (IFCS), vol. 13(4), pages 1083-1103, December.
    9. Kline, Patrick & Walters, Christopher, 2019. "Audits as Evidence: Experiments, Ensembles, and Enforcement," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt3z72m9kn, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
    10. He, Yi & Pan, Wei & Lin, Jizhen, 2006. "Cluster analysis using multivariate normal mixture models to detect differential gene expression with microarray data," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 641-658, November.
    11. Cheng, Cheng, 2009. "Internal validation inferences of significant genomic features in genome-wide screening," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 788-800, January.
    12. Sinjini Sikdar & Somnath Datta & Susmita Datta, 2017. "EAMA: Empirically adjusted meta-analysis for large-scale simultaneous hypothesis testing in genomic experiments," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-19, October.
    13. Tianwei Yu, 2018. "A new dynamic correlation algorithm reveals novel functional aspects in single cell and bulk RNA-seq data," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-22, August.
    14. Xiang, Qinfang & Edwards, Jode & Gadbury, Gary L., 2006. "Interval estimation in a finite mixture model: Modeling P-values in multiple testing applications," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 570-586, November.
    15. Gordon, Alexander & Chen, Linlin & Glazko, Galina & Yakovlev, Andrei, 2009. "Balancing type one and two errors in multiple testing for differential expression of genes," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 53(5), pages 1622-1629, March.
    16. Ruggieri, Eric & Lawrence, Charles E., 2012. "On efficient calculations for Bayesian variable selection," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(6), pages 1319-1332.
    17. Montazeri Zahra & Yanofsky Corey M. & Bickel David R., 2010. "Shrinkage Estimation of Effect Sizes as an Alternative to Hypothesis Testing Followed by Estimation in High-Dimensional Biology: Applications to Differential Gene Expression," Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-33, June.
    18. T. Tony Cai & Wenguang Sun, 2017. "Optimal screening and discovery of sparse signals with applications to multistage high throughput studies," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 79(1), pages 197-223, January.
    19. Yi-Hui Zhou & Paul Brooks & Xiaoshan Wang, 2018. "A Two-Stage Hidden Markov Model Design for Biomarker Detection, with Application to Microbiome Research," Statistics in Biosciences, Springer;International Chinese Statistical Association, vol. 10(1), pages 41-58, April.
    20. Woo, Chi-Keung & Horowitz, Ira & Olson, Arne & Horii, Brian & Baskette, Carmen, 2006. "Efficient frontiers for electricity procurement by an LDC with multiple purchase options," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 70-80, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:70:y:2010:i:3:p:479-484. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.