Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 2, 2026

Treatment Model for Young Patients with Psychogenic Erectile Dysfunction and Resultant Infertility
Published on: May 30, 2025
Variation in quality of physician communication in prostate cancer consultations
Nadine A Friedrich1,2,3, Michael Luu4, Renning Zheng1,5
1Department of Urology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Background:
Clear communication of treatment risks and benefits is essential for shared decision making (SDM) in prostate cancer (PC). However, the quality of physician communication in real-world consultations remains poorly characterized. We assessed variation in quality of risk communication in PC consultations and its association with patient, tumor, and provider characteristics.
Materials And Methods:
We conducted a prospective cohort study of 50 PC consultations in a multispecialty cohort of physicians (3 urologists, 3 medical oncologists, 3 radiation oncologists), with an analytic sample comprising 19,388 sentences. Transcripts were coded for five AUA-endorsed SDM content areas: cancer severity, life expectancy (LE), oncologic endpoints, baseline function, and treatment side effects (SEs). Analysts extracted all statements on these topics and scored communication quality using a validated 6-point scale (0 = omission, 1 = name only, 2 = binary assessment of risk, 3 = imprecise quantification, 4 = specific quantification, and 5 = patient-specific estimate). For each consultation, we calculated overall (weighted average) and content-specific scores. We then conducted an exploratory analysis of variation in communication quality by patient, tumor, and provider characteristics.
Results:
Communication quality varied substantially across consultations and content areas. Cancer severity had the highest median score (5, IQR 4-5), indicating this information was typically communicated using patient-specific estimates. LE had a median of 3 (IQR 2-5), indicating imprecise quantification. Oncologic endpoints also had a median of 3 (IQR 2-3). Baseline function and SEs had the lowest median of 1 (IQRs 1-2 and 0-2), indicating name-only communication. Exploratory analyses revealed that overall communication quality was lower for Black patients, higher among urologists, increased with higher tumor risk, and varied by physician. Content-specific quality did not improve in subgroups where the content was clinically relevant (e.g., LE quality was not higher for patients with limited LE).
Conclusions:
Quality of physician communication in PC consultations varies across content areas and may be influenced by patient, tumor, and provider characteristics.
Related Concept Videos
Barriers to Effective Communication II
Cultural barriers:
Differences in values, beliefs, religion, knowledge, and tradition can significantly impact communication. Awareness of nonverbal cues is critical, especially when conversing with a patient from a different culture. What appears appropriate in one culture may be inappropriate in another.
Semantic barriers:
As a result of their tendency to use...
Disorders of the Male Reproductive System
Prostate disorders are another major concern. These conditions can impair urinary flow due to the prostate's location around the urethra. Symptoms...
Therapeutic Communication
Verbal communication depends on language or a prescribed way of using words so that people can share information effectively. The critical aspects of verbal...
Techniques of Therapeutic Communication II: Focusing, Paraphrasing, and Summarizing
This therapeutic technique can also be used when a patient brings up pertinent information during a health-related conversation. The...
Communication
Within...
Patient-centered Care
