TY - JOUR T1 - Patient–clinician communication research for 21st century health care JF - British Journal of General Practice JO - Br J Gen Pract SP - 52 LP - 53 DO - 10.3399/bjgp22X718277 VL - 72 IS - 715 AU - Jackie van Dael AU - Alex Gillespie AU - Ana Luísa Neves AU - Ara Darzi Y1 - 2022/02/01 UR - http://bjgp.org/content/72/715/52.abstract N2 - The pandemic has accelerated the shift to the unchartered waters of virtual healthcare delivery. Unprecedented numbers of consultations are now held remotely, introducing a range of novel challenges and uncertainties. One major area of concern relates to potential impacts on patient–clinician communication. Research on this has been limited so far, but early studies have indicated that there are critical differences between how patients and clinicians interact over telephone or video compared to face to face. These include patients raising fewer issues, clinicians seeking less information, and less psycho–social talk.1The rapid development of a strong evidence base is urgently needed to understand if, when, and how communication is affected. With this objective in mind, we discuss major lines of inquiry in patient–clinician communication research, and argue why theoretical and methodological approaches from social sciences and linguistics will be particularly important in supporting future endeavours to identify and mitigate risks associated with virtual consultations.Despite decades of research, patient–clinician communication remains imprecisely defined and operationalised in health research.2 A large area of work has focused on clinician (and patient) skills and behaviours. Adopting umbrella constructs such as ‘patient-centred communication’ and ‘shared decision making’, these studies measure certain observable communication behaviours (such as information giving and socio-emotional talk) using observational coding and rating scales. Through such quantification, this strand of research has enabled the identification of associations between patterns of communication and critical outcomes (for example, satisfaction, malpractice claims, and adherence).3,4Yet, while such research will continue to be important for understanding systematic differences in content and outcomes between consultation modes, they must be accompanied by a focus on the interactional, situated, and process-like functioning of communication.Deviating from popular methods in mainstream … ER -