↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Patient education, nudge, and manipulation: defining the ethical conditions of the person-centered model of care

Overview of attention for article published in Patient preference and adherence, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
Title
Patient education, nudge, and manipulation: defining the ethical conditions of the person-centered model of care
Published in
Patient preference and adherence, April 2016
DOI 10.2147/ppa.s99627
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gérard Reach

Abstract

Patient education (PE) is expected to help patients with a chronic disease to manage their lives and give them the possibility of adopting, in an appropriate manner, beneficial changes in health behaviors that are prescribed by their physicians. It is aimed at delineating, agreeing on, and implementing a patient's personal action plan and is therefore an essential constituent of the person-centered model of care. The aim of this article is to examine the idea that PE may sometimes be a manipulation that is organized for the good of patients in a paternalistic framework. Theoretically, PE differs from manipulation by addressing the reflective intelligence of patients in full light and helping them make autonomous choices. In this article, we examined some analogies between PE and nudge (ie, techniques used to push people to make good choices by organizing their environment). This analysis suggests that PE is not always as transparent and reflective as it is supposed to be and that unmasking these issues may be useful for improving the ethical quality of educational practice that must be performed in a framework of a trusting patient-doctor relationship. Under this condition, PE may sometimes represent a form of persuasion without being accused of patient deception and manipulation: trust is therefore the core of the person-centered model of care.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Bangladesh 1 <1%
Unknown 103 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 17%
Researcher 13 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Professor 6 6%
Other 19 18%
Unknown 26 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 16%
Psychology 12 11%
Social Sciences 9 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 5%
Other 26 25%
Unknown 28 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 October 2022.
All research outputs
#6,784,032
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#438
of 1,764 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,723
of 314,933 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#21
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,764 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 314,933 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.