There is no quantifiable form of “rude”. 11 second interruption times, (that by the way are not explained by irrelevant blathering. From Claude: “77% of patients (258/335) finished their initial statement within 2 minutes, and only 2% (7/335) spoke for more than 5 uninterrupted minutes. In all cases, physicians considered the information they were given to be relevant. So letting patients finish takes about two minutes for ~80% of cases, and the doctors themselves judged the information relevant. The interruptions aren’t saving meaningful time.”), plus an inverse correlation between self reported empathy scores and those of patients, plus enormous (often majority) percentages of patients reporting some form of neglect or dismissal in surveys, plus virtually ubiquitous and unidirectional anecdotes, is as strong of an empirical case for a profession being “rude” I think you are ever likely to get.
Having taken a quick look at the source for Claude’s data, it seems like a reasonable read is that the doctors are simply not well-calibrated on the relevance of the patients statements and redirect them away too quickly. Not sure this means they were ‘rude’,
The HCAHPS survey measures ‘courteousness’ by asking patients, and consistently find that in ~85% of cases, doctors are rated ‘always’ respectful and courteous. From my understanding, a further ~10% are rated as ‘usually’ respectful and courteous. This is not a perfect measure, but seems better than using interruption times as a proxy.
There is no quantifiable form of “rude”. 11 second interruption times, (that by the way are not explained by irrelevant blathering. From Claude: “77% of patients (258/335) finished their initial statement within 2 minutes, and only 2% (7/335) spoke for more than 5 uninterrupted minutes. In all cases, physicians considered the information they were given to be relevant. So letting patients finish takes about two minutes for ~80% of cases, and the doctors themselves judged the information relevant. The interruptions aren’t saving meaningful time.”), plus an inverse correlation between self reported empathy scores and those of patients, plus enormous (often majority) percentages of patients reporting some form of neglect or dismissal in surveys, plus virtually ubiquitous and unidirectional anecdotes, is as strong of an empirical case for a profession being “rude” I think you are ever likely to get.
Having taken a quick look at the source for Claude’s data, it seems like a reasonable read is that the doctors are simply not well-calibrated on the relevance of the patients statements and redirect them away too quickly. Not sure this means they were ‘rude’,
The HCAHPS survey measures ‘courteousness’ by asking patients, and consistently find that in ~85% of cases, doctors are rated ‘always’ respectful and courteous. From my understanding, a further ~10% are rated as ‘usually’ respectful and courteous. This is not a perfect measure, but seems better than using interruption times as a proxy.