Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Apr;46(2):491-509.
doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2010.01214.x. Epub 2010 Dec 9.

Using standardized encounters to understand reported racial/ethnic disparities in patient experiences with care

Robin M Weinick  1 , Marc N Elliott, Angelo E Volandes, Lenny Lopez, Q Burkhart, Mark Schlesinger
Affiliations

Using standardized encounters to understand reported racial/ethnic disparities in patient experiences with care

Robin M Weinick et al. Health Serv Res. 2011 Apr.

Abstract

Objective: To assess the extent to which racial/ethnic differences in ratings of patient experiences with health care represent true differences versus differences in expectations, how scales are used, or how identical physician-patient interactions are perceived by members of different groups.

Study setting: Primary data collection from a nationally representative online panel (n=567), including white, African American, and Latino respondents.

Study design: We administered questions on expectations of care, a series of written vignettes, a video-depicted doctor-patient interaction, and modified CAHPS Clinician and Group Doctor Communication items.

Principal findings: Different groups reported generally similar expectations regarding physicians' behaviors and provided similar mean responses to CAHPS communication items in response to standardized encounters.

Conclusions: Preliminary evidence suggests that unlike more subjective global ratings, reported disparities in more specific and objective CAHPS composites may primarily reflect differences in experiences, rather than differences in expectations and scale use, adding to our confidence in using the latter to assess disparities.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. 2008. “CAHPS Clinician & Group Survey and Reporting Kit 2008: Fielding the CAHPS Clinician & Group Survey” [accessed November 15, 2010]. Available at https://www.cahps.ahrq.gov/CAHPSkit/files/33_CG_Fielding_the_Survey.pdf. - PubMed
    1. Baker L, Wagner TH, Singer S, Bundorf MK. Use of the Internet and E-Mail for Health Care Information: Results from a National Survey. Journal of the American Medical Association. 2003;289(18):2400–6. Appendix: “Validity of the Survey of Health and Internet and Knowledge Network's Panel and Sampling” [accessed on November 15, 2010]. Available at http://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2004/oct/pdf/04_0004_01.pdf. - PubMed
    1. Burke BL, Arkowitz H, Menchola M. The Efficacy of Motivational Interviewing: A Meta-Analysis of Controlled Clinical Trials. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2003;71:843–61. - PubMed
    1. Dayton E, Zhan C, Sangl J, Darby C, Moy E. Racial and Ethnic Differences in Patient Assessments of Interactions with Providers: Disparities or Measurement Biases? American Journal of Medical Quality. 2006;21(2):109–14. - PubMed
    1. DeNavas-Walt C, Proctor BD, Smith JC. Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2007. Current Population Reports P60-235, U.S. Census Bureau. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office; 2008.

Publication types