Analyzing Physician Communication Skills in Patient Satisfaction Research
This paper addresses two methodological questions in qualitative health research: how to define a unit of analysis when examining video recordings of physician-patient interactions, and how to develop initial codes for studying doctor communication skills. The paper argues that communication serves as the most appropriate unit of analysis because it is the strongest predictor of patient assessments of physicians. It estimates approximately twenty-five data units from the recordings and reflects on their adequacy. Drawing on the literature on patient satisfaction, the paper then proposes seven initial codes—including listening, clarity of explanation, and patient involvement in decisions—and justifies them as measurable, patient-validated indicators of physician effectiveness.
- Unit of Analysis in Physician-Patient Communication Research: Communication chosen as unit; rationale and data estimate
- Adequacy of the Estimated Data Units: Why twenty-five units may be insufficient
- Initial Codes for Physician Communication Skills: Seven patient-validated communication dimensions as codes
- Justifying the Code Set in a Research Report: Rationale for codes; operationalization through rating scales
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper directly connects methodological choices—such as selecting a unit of analysis—to substantive reasoning grounded in the research literature, rather than treating them as purely procedural decisions.
- Each claim is supported by peer-reviewed citations, lending academic credibility to what might otherwise read as opinion-based responses to discussion prompts.
- The proposed coding scheme is practical and concrete, offering seven distinct, patient-validated communication dimensions that could realistically be applied to observational data.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates literature-informed methodological justification: rather than simply naming a unit of analysis or a set of codes, the author explains why each choice is appropriate by grounding it in findings from published health communication research. This technique—using prior scholarship to defend design decisions—is essential in qualitative research reports.
Structure breakdown
The paper is organized around two discrete research methodology questions. The first section defines communication as the unit of analysis, provides a rationale drawn from patient satisfaction literature, estimates the number of data units, and evaluates their adequacy. The second section proposes and justifies an initial set of qualitative codes for physician communication, concluding with a note on how those codes could be operationalized through rating scales. A Works Cited section follows in APA-adjacent format.
Unit of Analysis in Physician-Patient Communication Research
Through the analysis of the recordings, communication would serve as the most appropriate unit of analysis. Effective doctor-patient communication is vital to constructive clinical relationships and is associated with better health outcomes. Moreover, doctor communication is regarded as the strongest and most reliable predictor of patient assessments and evaluations of physicians (Quigley et al., 2014). Proper communication skills—together with attentiveness, adequate time, careful listening, and clear explanations—are among the qualities patients value most in physicians.
Reports of physician communication from patients are considered consistent and reliable predictors of overall physician ratings among both specialists and primary care providers (Quigley et al., 2014, p. 447). The communication measures evaluate how frequently a physician explains medical matters clearly, listens carefully to the patient, provides easy-to-understand instructions, shows respect, and spends sufficient time with the patient (Quigley et al., 2014, p. 448). These dimensions are also well suited to observational research, as they can be directly observed in video recordings of physician-patient interactions.
Adequacy of the Estimated Data Units
Based on this unit of analysis, approximately twenty-five data units are likely to be obtained from the recordings. However, this estimated number does not appear to be an adequate measure of physician effectiveness. The qualitative sample is not sufficiently large to ensure that the research captures the majority—or all—of the insights that may be significant. Patients may hold varying perspectives on the physicians they encounter and may therefore provide different ratings. A small sample size increases the likelihood of obtaining a narrow range of insights, limiting the generalizability of findings.
Initial Codes for Physician Communication Skills
When assembling patient satisfaction indicators to inform patients' choices of care providers, it is desirable to report communication scores at the level of individual practitioners or within settings where such assessments can be conducted consistently. Communication is a significant driver of overall patient satisfaction, and ensuring patients have access to accurate performance information is essential if they are to make informed choices among providers (Roberts et al., 2014).
Some initial codes that could be used to label the data units include the following dimensions of physician communication skill: giving the patient sufficient and adequate time; questioning the patient about their symptoms; listening attentively to what the patient says; clearly and properly explaining tests and treatments; involving the patient in decisions regarding their care; treating the patient with care and concern; and taking the patient's medical problems seriously (Roberts et al., 2014). These seven dimensions represent a comprehensive set of observable communication behaviors that patients have identified as meaningful.
Works Cited
Quigley, D. D., Elliott, M. N., Farley, D. O., Burkhart, Q., Skootsky, S. A., & Hays, R. D. (2014). Specialties differ in which aspects of doctor communication predict overall physician ratings. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 29(3), 447–454. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-013-2663-2
Roberts, M. J., Campbell, J. L., Abel, G. A., Davey, A. F., Elmore, N. L., Maramba, I., ... & Burt, J. A. (2014). Understanding high and low patient experience scores in primary care: Analysis of patients' survey data for general practices and individual doctors. BMJ, 349, g6034. http://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g6034
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.