Table 1.
Descriptions and participant characteristics of studies related to physician self-disclosure (ordered by method and year)
| Source [Design] | Year of publication | Participants (Location) | Participants n | Participant response rate | Participant characteristics | Data collection method | Study question |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holmes et al [MM]10 | 2010 | Paediatricians (Southern University paediatric department US) | 4 | 100% | Physicians: 2 female, 2 male, all white. Parents 85% female, 85% white, and 11% African American | Audiotapes of 80 parent visits | Is there a relationship between paediatrician SD and parent satisfaction? |
| McDaniel et al [MM]5 | 2007 | Primary care physicians (Rochester, NY, US) | 100 | 34% | Mean age 45 years, 77% male, 47% family medicine, 53% internal medicine, 76% group practice, 68% urban/suburban | Audiotapes of 113 standardised patient visits. Coding agreed by consensus | What are the antecedents, delivery, and effects of SD in primary care visits? |
| Beach et al [MM]9 | 2004 | Primary care physicians and surgeons (Colorado and Oregon, US) | 125 physicians: 66 surgeons (general and orthopaedic) 59 primary care (general internist and family physicians) | Surgeons 89% and primary care 74% Patients 80% | Physicians: graduated 13 years, white, 94% male, 93% in practice 18 years Patients: >18 years, English-speaking, not distressed; white 86%, female 57%, age 53 years, 27% college graduated | Audiotapes of, 265 patient visits. Analysis coder reliability 0.94 | What do physicians disclose about themselves to patients? Not designed as a study on SD |
| Beach et al [CS]8 | 2004 | As Beach et al above | As Beach et al above | As Beach et al above | As Beach et al above | As above but with patient completed surveys | Is physician SD related to patient evaluation of office visits? Not designed as a study on SD |
| Allen et al [Q]11 | 2015 | GPs (Auckland, New Zealand) | 16 | 33% | 8 female | Audiotapes on SD. Coding by consensus | What are your views on SD? |
| Malterud et al [Q]7 | 2009 | GPs (Norway) | 12 | 100% | Physicians: 5 males, 7 females; aged 30–68 years; Experience 1–39 years | Audiotapes of two 90-minute group discussions with participants. No reliability assessment | What are the conditions in which disclosure of a doctor’s vulnerability is beneficial to patients? |
| Malterud and Hollnagel [Q]6 | 2005 | GPs, psychologists, sociologists/patients (Denmark) | 7 GPs/psychologists, 2 sociologists; either as clinicians or their own patient experience | 100% | Physicians: 2 males, 7 females; aged 36–61 years. | Memory stories and audiotapes of group discussions. No reliability assessment | How can exposing doctor’s vulnerability be of benefit to patients? |
| Candib [Q]3 | 1987 | Experienced family physicians known to the author, (UK) | N/R | N/R | Most family physicians, varied ages, substantial practice experience | Conversations with participants by the author wherever the participants could be approached | What do doctors share with patients and what are the implications of such disclosures for the relationship? |
CS = cross sectional. MM = mixed methods. N/R = not reported. Q = qualitative. SD = physician self-disclosure. Coders refers to those analysing the audiotranscripts.