Journal of General Internal Medicine

, Volume 26, Issue 8, pp 846–851

Is Primary Care Providers’ Trust in Socially Marginalized Patients Affected by Race?

  • David Moskowitz
  • David H. Thom
  • David Guzman
  • Joanne Penko
  • Christine Miaskowski
  • Margot Kushel
Open Access
Original Research



Interpersonal trust plays an important role in the clinic visit. Clinician trust in the patient may be especially important when prescribing opioid analgesics because of concerns about misuse. Previous studies have found that non-white patients are perceived negatively by clinicians.


To examine whether clinicians’ trust in patients differed by patients’ race/ethnicity in a socially marginalized cohort.


Cross-sectional study of patient-clinician dyads.


169 HIV infected indigent patients recruited from the community and their 61 primary care providers (PCPs.)


The Physician Trust in Patients Scale (PTPS), a validated scale that measures PCPs’ trust in patients.


The mean PTPS score was 43.2 (SD 10.8) out of a possible 60. Reported current illicit drug use and prescription opioid misuse were similar across patients’ race or ethnicity. However, both patient illicit drug use and patient non-white race/ethnicity were associated with lower PTPS scores. In a multivariate model, non-white race/ethnicity was independently associated with PTPS scores 6.3 points lower than whites (95% CI: −9.9, −2.7). Current illicit drug use was associated with PTSP scores 5.5 lower than no drug use (95% CI −8.5, −2.5).


In a socially marginalized cohort, non-white patients were trusted less than white patients by their PCPs, despite similar rates of illicit drug use and opioid analgesic misuse. The effect was independent of illicit drug use. This finding may reflect unconscious stereotypes by PCPs and may underlie disparities in chronic pain management.


trust communication vulnerable populations opioid analgesics disparities 


Interpersonal trust is an important aspect of the clinical encounter. Trust is defined as one’s expectation that another will behave in a particular way1 and implies that both parties understand that each others’ interests will not be violated2. It reflects reliability, understanding and information sharing, all key components of high quality communication3,4. In contrast to patients’ trust in clinicians,3,5 clinicians’ trust in patients has not been investigated.

While some clinical decisions are based on clear objective measures, others, such as the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain, are based on more subjective assessments. The treatment of chronic pain is further complicated by the fact that while consideration of opioid analgesics is reasonable for moderate to severe pain, their use must be balanced against the risk of opioid misuse6, 7, 8, 9.

A number of patient characteristics are associated with an increase risk of opioid analgesic misuse, including history of alcohol abuse or illicit drug use10, 11, 12. However, clinicians do not conform their decisions to these well described risk factors. Patients’ race/ethnicity affect treatment decisions13, 14, 15. Additionally, the treatment of chronic pain varies by clinicians’ experience and training8,16.

In qualitative studies, clinicians have identified mutual trust as an important factor influencing chronic pain management and the prescription of opioid analgesics7,17, 18, 19. Clinicians judge patients’ risk of misuse based on “gut feelings” rather than on specific clinical characteristics associated with risk of misuse17. Thus, clinicians’ trust in their patients may play a large role in decisions surrounding chronic pain management.

Characteristics such as patients’ race/ethnicity may affect clinicians’ trust. Studies have demonstrated that physicians perceive African American patients more negatively20. Assessing the relationship between patient race/ethnicity and clinician trust in the patient may be helpful in understanding the effect of race/ethnicity on physician attitudes and behaviors. We analyzed a cohort of socially marginalized patients with HIV and their primary care providers in order to examine the association between race/ethnicity and trust in a uniformly low SES population with high rates of illicit drug use and prescription opioid analgesic misuse.


Setting and Participants

In order to assess clinicians’ trust in patients, we conducted a dyad study that involved a subset of community-based indigent participants enrolled in a longitudinal observational cohort study of pain (the Pain Study) and their primary care providers (PCPs). We recruited participants for the Pain Study from the Research on Access to Care in the Homeless (REACH) study. The REACH study was a prospective cohort of HIV-infected homeless and marginally housed adults in San Francisco. The REACH cohort was recruited through systematic sampling from homeless shelters, free-meal programs, and single room-occupancy hotels21,22 in three waves (1996–1998, 1999–2000, and 2003). REACH participants were interviewed quarterly regarding illicit drug use, housing status and healthcare utilization at a research field site (University of California San Francisco’s Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute Tenderloin Clinical Research Center). For the Pain Study, we recruited all REACH participants who completed study visits between September 2007 and June 2008.

The Pain Study involved a baseline visit and seven quarterly follow-up interviews that occurred every three months coinciding with REACH follow-up quarterly interviews. For the Pain Study, participants completed a structured interview about pain, opioid analgesic use and misuse, and health care utilization related to pain management. At baseline, we conducted the Diagnostic Interview Schedule-IV (DIS-IV)23 substance and alcohol modules. At each follow-up visit, participants completed the REACH questionnaire and the Pain Study Follow-up Questionnaire, a 25-minute abbreviated version of the baseline questionnaire. Trained interviewers administered all of the questionnaires, except for questions about opioid analgesic misuse, which participants completed using Audio Computer Assisted Self Interview (ACASI) technology. ACASI is an acceptable method to use with low-literacy populations and improves the reliability of sensitive information24.

We recruited one PCP for each participant who was active in follow-up one year into the study. If a participant provided informed consent to contact their PCP, and identified a provider who fit our definition (a medical doctor, nurse practitioner (NP), or physician assistant (PA) in outpatient practice providing longitudinal, comprehensive care), we contacted the PCP and asked them to complete a questionnaire about themselves and a separate questionnaire specific to each of their patients enrolled in the study. The provider-specific questionnaire included questions about the PCP’s demographics and practice characteristics. The patient-specific questionnaire included questions about the patient’s medical conditions, use and misuse of prescription opioid analgesics, and the Physician Trust in Patients Scale25. We recommended, but did not require, that PCPs refer to patient medical records when they completed the survey. The study was approved by the University of California San Francisco’s Institutional Review Board and patients and PCPs provided written informed consent.

Independent Variables: Patient-Level

We obtained patient self-reported biological sex, date of birth, race/ethnicity and history of incarceration in state or federal prison at entry in the REACH cohort. We ascertained race/ethnicity by having patients select racial or ethnic categories from the following list: White, African American, Latino, Asian, Native American, Pacific Islander, or mixed race. We collapsed Asian, Native American, Pacific Islander and mixed race into a single category due to the small number of respondents in each of these categories. We measured alcohol abuse and dependence through responses to the DIS-IV23. In the DIS-IV, alcohol abuse and dependence is defined in a manner consistent with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders26. We assessed current use of illicit drugs using responses from the patient’s REACH questionnaire completed closest in time to the PCP’s completed questionnaire. We defined current use as a “yes” response to questions about use of cocaine, heroin or methamphetamines in the past 90 days. We combined use of cocaine, heroin or methamphetamine into a single variable, as we hypothesized that PCPs would not distinguish between the three categories with regard to trust10.

We measured opioid analgesic misuse through patients’ responses to yes/no questions about specific misuse behaviors using ACASI technology27. Items addressed using opioid analgesics to get high; trading them for money, illicit drugs or sex; lying to their PCP about opioid analgesics; forging prescriptions for opioids; or augmenting the effect of prescription opioid analgesics with illicit drugs or alcohol. We aggregated responses, defining misuse as an affirmative answer to any one of these questions on the Pain Study questionnaire completed closest in time to the PCP survey.

Independent Variables: Clinician-Level

In addition to PCPs’ sex, age, race and ethnicity, we evaluated years in practice and training (physician, PA or NP.) We asked each PCP to estimate the proportion of their patient panel with chronic pain. We collapsed PA and NP into a single category. We collapsed PCP race and ethnicity into two categories, non-Latino white and all others, owing to the small number of PCPs who were of minority racial or ethnic groups. We recorded years in practice as a categorical variable: 0 to 3, 4 to 9, 10 to 19 and 20 or greater.

Dependent Variable

We measured PCPs’ trust in patients with the Physician Trust in the Patient Scale (PTPS), which was validated in the Pain Study cohort25. The PTPS has high internal reliability with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.93 and was shown to have convergent validity with clinician reported perceptions of patients’ behaviors expected to be associated with lower levels of trust.

The PTPS consists of 12 questions that are rated on a 5-point Likert scale with responses that range from (0, “not at all confident”) to (5, “completely confident”) (Text Box). A total score is the sum of the 12 items that can range from 0 to 60. Higher scores indicate greater perceptions of trust.
Text Box

Physician Trust in Patient Scale (PTPS) questions.


Our main analytic goal was to estimate the association of patient race/ethnicity and PTPS scores. We selected independent variables a priori that might confound the relationship between patient race/ethnicity and PCPs’ trust in patients. We entered all variables into the model simultaneously. After testing confirmed that all non-white patient groups had lower PTPS scores, we collapsed them for the multivariate analysis. We analyzed bivariate and multivariate associations using generalized estimating equations, an extension of the linear model providing robust standard errors, p-values, and confidence intervals that account for the correlation among the multiple responses of each PCP for a panel of patients28,29.


Of the 296 patients initially enrolled in the Pain Study, 240 were active in the study at one year and provided written consent that allowed us to contact their PCP. We contacted a total of 90 PCPs for these patients of whom 61 PCPs returned completed questionnaires for a total of 169 patients.

Two-thirds of patients were male (65.1%), half were African American (46.8%), and their average age was 50 years. Approximately one quarter (27.8%) reported current use of illicit drugs. Approximately one quarter (22.5%) reported misusing opioid analgesics in the past 90 days. Most had experienced homelessness (82.0%) though few were homeless at the time of the study (5.0%). Most had a high school education or less (73.4%). The median annual income was $11,280. PCPs were mostly white (78.3%). Approximately half (46.0%) were male. The majority were in practice between 10 and 19 years. None were in practice fewer than four years. Most (83.6%) were physicians (Table 1).
Table 1

Patient (n = 169) and Provider (n = 61) Demographic Characteristics, and Unadjusted Association of Predictors with Physicians’ Trust in Patients Scale (PTSP) Scores


n (%)

PTPS score (SE)


Total sample (mean, SD)


43.2 (10.8)


Patient age (years, SD)

49.5 (6.9)

0.1 (0.1)*


Patient sex



110 (65)

44 (1.1)



59 (35)

42 (1.5)


Annual income (median, IQR)

11,280 (10,440, 11,904)





 Less than high school

49 (29)



 Finished high school

75 (45)



 Greater than high school

44 (26)



Patient race/ethnicity



60 (36)

47.3 (1.4)


 African American

79 (47)

41.6 (1.2)



12 (7)

42.8 (2.5)



13 (8)

35.9 (2.9)


Opioid analgesic misuse



73 (43)

44.3 (2.0)



96 (57)

39.7 (1.8)


Current drug use



122 (72)

44.8 (1.0)



47 (28)

39.2 (1.6)


Lifetime alcohol abuse or dependence§



68 (41)

43.3 (1.4)



96 (59)

43.2 (1.27)


Lifetime history of homelessness

136 (82)



Homeless at time of interview

10 (5)



Incarceration (prison)

25 (16)



Provider sex



28 (46)

44.1 (1.27)



33 (54)

42.5 (1.25)


Provider age (years, s.d.)

46.7 (8.3)



Provider race/ethnicity



47 (71)

43.2 (1.0)



13 (29)

43.3 (1.9)


Provider type



10 (16)

45.1 (1.8)



51 (84)

42.7 (1.0)


Years in practice


 4 to 9

11 (18)

45.2 (2.6)


 10 to 19

31 (51)

43.6 (1.1)


 > 20

19 (31)

41.9 (1.4)


Clinic panel with chronic pain



29 (48)

43.8 (1.4)


 About half

24 (39)

41.8 (1.3)


 Most to almost all

8 (13)

45.3 (1.9)


*Change in PTPS per 1 year change in patient age

Answering yes to any of the following in the past 90 days: using opioid analgesics to get high; trading them for money, illicit drugs or sex; lying to their PCP about opioid analgesics; forging prescriptions for opioids; or augmenting the effect of prescription opioid analgesics with illicit drugs or alcohol

Answering “yes” to having used cocaine, heroin or methamphetamines in the past 90 days

§DIS-IV criteria

The prevalence of current illicit drug use as well as opioid analgesic misuse did not differ in a manner that was statistically significant between racial or ethnic groups (p = 0.71 and p = 0.18 respectively). The mean PTPS score was 43.2 (SD 10.8.) Bivariate models showed an association of both African American and “other” patient race with lower mean PTPS scores, as well as an association between current illicit drug use, as reported by the patient and lower mean PTPS scores (Table 1). Bivariate models showed a trend towards lower PTPS scores among patients who reported opioid analgesic misuse although the effect did not reach statistical significance.

In the adjusted multivariate analysis, non-white patient race/ethnicity was significantly associated with lower PTPS scores (Table 2). Current drug use was also associated with lower PTPS scores (p < 0.01). Opioid analgesic misuse was not significantly associated with differences in PTPS scores (p < 0.01). PCPs with more than 20 years in practice rated patients as having significantly lower PTPS scores (p < 0.05). The test for trend across categories was significant at p < 0.05. The Wald statistic for the multivariate model was 52.4 with p < 0.001.
Table 2

Multivariate Model for Physicians’ Trust in Patients Scale (PTPS) Scores


Change in PTPS score (95% CI)





3.1 (−1.1, 7.2)


 Age (years)

0.1 (−0.1, 0.3)



-6.3 (−9.9, -2.7)


 Opioid analgesic misuse*

-4.7 (−10.1, 0.7)


 Current drug use

-5.5 (−8.5, -2.5)


 Lifetime alcohol abuse or dependence

1.2 (−1.7, 4.1)





-1.1 (−5.3, 3.1)



0.6 (−3.3, 4.4)



-2.7 (−7.9, 2.4)


Years in practice


  4 to 9



  10 to 19

-2.6 (−7.7, 2.4)


  > 20

-6.8 (−12.2, -1.5)


Clinic panel with chronic pain





  About half

0.3 (−3.6, 4.2)


  Most to almost all

2.3 (−1.9, 6.5)


*Answering yes to any of the following in the past 90 days: using opioid analgesics to get high; trading them for money, illicit drugs or sex; lying to their PCP about opioid analgesics; forging prescriptions for opioids; or augmenting the effect of prescription opioid analgesics with illicit drugs or alcohol

Answering “yes” to having used cocaine, heroin or methamphetamines in the past 90 days

DIS-IV criteria


Our study found that in a cohort of socially marginalized patients with HIV infection receiving primary care, PCPs reported less trust of patients with a history of illicit drug use and patients who were of non-white race/ethnicities. Our findings are consistent with studies that suggest variations in PCPs’ attitudes and prescribing decisions in different racial groups with chronic pain14,30. They extend the literature by specifically investigating the construct of trust within a low socioeconomic status cohort. In this sample, where every patient is indigent and many have significant illicit substance use and incarceration histories—and therefore is at higher than average risk for opioid analgesic misuse—one might not expect such variation in trust scores across different racial/ethnic groups. Our finding of attitudes of distrust towards non-white patients is consistent with studies of the general population31, 32, 33. In our study sample, rates of illicit substance use and opioid analgesic misuse were similar among racial groups. This finding is consistent with previous reports that showed that African Americans are no more likely to misuse prescription opioid analgesics than are whites10.

Trust in patients represents an important component of the clinical encounter and may serve as a provider-level mediator of disparities in care34. Even in this study of socially marginalized patients, PCPs’ trust in patients appears to be guided in part by perceptions of racial/ethnic groups, and not solely by individual patients’ illicit drug use or opioid analgesic misuse. Trust is based on a subjective assessment of the patient, and may be influenced by unconscious biases and stereotypes. Clinical situations with high degrees of “cognitive load” (e.g. risk, stress, uncertainty) generally increase providers reliance on biases and stereotypes35,36. Chronic pain management, with the possibility of medication diversion and the simultaneous concern of under-treatment of pain, presents just such a situation. Thus, PCPs’ differential trust of non-white patients’ in a cohort of indigent patients might underlie well demonstrated disparities in pain management13,37, 38, 39.

The risk, uncertainty, and lack of objective findings that typify the management of chronic pain are not unique to this condition. Many conditions commonly encountered in primary care lack clear objective findings and are managed very differently between providers. Therefore, it is likely that trust in patients plays a role in many other clinical decisions.

Aside from clinical uncertainty, there are two characteristics of trust in patients that make it particularly relevant to clinical decision-making. First, the construct of trust is future oriented: it involves an expectation of future actions40,41. Especially in primary care relationships that involve prevention or management of chronic diseases, differential expectations of patients’ future actions have the potential to modify clinical decisions such as medication intensification. Second, trust is closely related to power. Communication strategies such as patient-centered communication, where the patient’s perspective is elicited and incorporated into decision making, requires sharing power and responsibility42. Clinicians’ trust of their patient is a necessary step in this process2. Differences in trust may affect the degree to which patient-centered communication can be achieved.

PCPs who were in practice longer reported lower trust scores of his or her patients. It is possible that an accumulation of negative experiences with patients may lead to decreases in trust. Alternatively, this association may represent broader issues of decreased professional satisfaction, more prevalent among older providers43. Finally, while our study was underpowered to explore whether the length of time in practice differentially affected trust in patients by race/ethnicity, a third potential explanation is that recent increased emphasis in educational settings about disparities and biases/stereotypes has led to more recently trained providers’ greater trust scores.

Our findings speak to the need to better train clinicians in how to recognize and account for unconscious racial biases and stereotypes. Unconscious attitudes represent an important aspect of disparities education. Training about assumptions and biases may be best integrated into teaching clinical decision-making: increasing clinicians’ awareness of biases and encouraging careful consideration of decisions based on intuition. Alternatively, tests of implicit assumptions may serve an educational role in increasing clinicians’ self-awareness of unconscious biases44.

Several limitations need to be acknowledged. The social marginalization of patients (marginally housed, HIV infected, with high rates of illicit drug use) limits the generalizability of findings to other populations. Our sample size was relatively small and, in particular, the number of non-white PCPs was small. This limited our ability to analyze patient-clinician racial/ethnic concordance, an important contributor to processes of care45. Finally, although socioeconomic status (SES) is a common confounder of race and affects PCPs’ perceptions,20 the uniformly low SES of the patients in this study decreases the chance of SES confounding the relationship.

Findings from this study suggest that patients’ race/ethnicity affects PCPs’ trust in patients in a socially marginalized cohort. PCPs caring for similar populations should be aware of the potential for both their trust in patients and their interpretation of behaviors to be affected by unconscious racial biases. Our findings add support for the implementation of standardized policies regarding chronic pain management as an alternative to management strategies that rely on PCP discretion. Policies such as urine toxiciology and pain treatment agreements have the potential to standardize care. However, recent evidence suggests that their routine use should be reconsidered because of limited evidence of their effectiveness46. As new approaches to chronic pain management are developed, close attention must be paid to the role of providers’ unconscious biases, and the potential for racial biases to be translated into disparities in care. Future research on PCPs’ trust in patients should target its role as a potential mediator of clinical decision-making, the role of PCP race/ethnicity, as well as whether our findings generalize to other clinical settings and to less marginalized populations.



Dr. Moskowitz was supported by the Primary Care Research Fellowship at UCSF, funded by HRSA D55HP05165.

This project was supported by NIDA R01DA022550, NIMH R01MH54907, and NIH/NCRR UCSF-CTSI Grant Number UL1 RR024131.

Conflicts of Interest

None disclosed.

Open Access

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.


  1. 1.
    Thom DH, Campbell B. Patient-physician trust: an exploratory study. J Fam Pract. Feb 1997;44(2):169–76.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Grimen H. Power, trust, and risk: some reflections on an absent issue. Med Anthropol Q. Mar 2009;23(1):16–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Thom DH, Hall MA, Pawlson LG. Measuring patients' trust in physicians when assessing quality of care. Health Aff (Millwood). Jul-Aug 2004;23(4):124–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mechanic D. The functions and limitations of trust in the provision of medical care. J Health Polit Policy Law. Aug 1998;23(4):661–86.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hall MA, Zheng B, Dugan E, et al. Measuring patients' trust in their primary care providers. Med Care Res Rev. Sep 2002;59(3):293–318.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Scanlon MN, Chugh U. Exploring physicians' comfort level with opioids for chronic noncancer pain. Pain Res Manag. Winter 2004;9(4):195–201.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Merrill JO, Rhodes LA, Deyo RA, Marlatt GA, Bradley KA. Mutual mistrust in the medical care of drug users: the keys to the "narc" cabinet. J Gen Intern Med. May 2002;17(5):327–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Breitbart W, Kaim M, Rosenfeld B. Clinicians' perceptions of barriers to pain management in AIDS. J Pain Symptom Manage. Sep 1999;18(3):203–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Berg KM, Arnsten JH, Sacajiu G, Karasz A. Providers' experiences treating chronic pain among opioid-dependent drug users. J Gen Intern Med. Apr 2009;24(4):482–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ives TJ, Chelminski PR, Hammett-Stabler CA, et al. Predictors of opioid misuse in patients with chronic pain: a prospective cohort study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2006;6:46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Edlund MJ, Steffick D, Hudson T, Harris KM, Sullivan M. Risk factors for clinically recognized opioid abuse and dependence among veterans using opioids for chronic non-cancer pain. Pain. Jun 2007;129(3):355–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chabal C, Erjavec MK, Jacobson L, Mariano A, Chaney E. Prescription opiate abuse in chronic pain patients: clinical criteria, incidence, and predictors. Clin J Pain. Jun 1997;13(2):150–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Green CR, Anderson KO, Baker TA, et al. The unequal burden of pain: confronting racial and ethnic disparities in pain. Pain Med. Sep 2003;4(3):277–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Burgess DJ, Crowley-Matoka M, Phelan S, et al. Patient race and physicians' decisions to prescribe opioids for chronic low back pain. Soc Sci Med. Dec 2008;67(11):1852–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mills AM, Shofer FS, Boulis AK, Holena DN, Abbuhl SB. Racial disparity in analgesic treatment for ED patients with abdominal or back pain. Am J Emerg Med. Apr 30 2010.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Green CR, Wheeler JR, Marchant B, LaPorte F, Guerrero E. Analysis of the physician variable in pain management. Pain Med. Dec 2001;2(4):317–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Crowley-Matoka M. Political and moral economies of managing pain. American Anthropological Association annual meeting. Washington, DC; 2005.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Henderson S, Stacey CL, Dohan D. Social stigma and the dilemmas of providing care to substance users in a safety-net emergency department. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2008 Nov 2008;19(4):1336–49.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stepanikova I, Cook, KS, Thom, DH, Kramer, RM, Mollborn, SB. Trust in Managed Care Settings: Physicians’ Perspective. In: Karen S. Cook KS LM, Hardin R, ed. Who Can We Trust?: How Groups, Networks, and Institutions Make Trust Possible. Thousand Oaks, CA: Rusell Sage Foundation; 2009.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    van Ryn M, Burke J. The effect of patient race and socio-economic status on physicians' perceptions of patients. Soc Sci Med. Mar 2000;50(6):813–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Robertson MJ, Clark RA, Charlebois ED, et al. HIV seroprevalence among homeless and marginally housed adults in San Francisco. Am J Public Health. Jul 2004;94(7):1207–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zolopa AR, Hahn JA, Gorter R, et al. HIV and tuberculosis infection in San Francisco's homeless adults. Prevalence and risk factors in a representative sample. Jama. Aug 10 1994;272(6):455–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Horton J, Compton, W, Cottler, L. Assessing Psychiatric Disorders Among Drug Users: Reliability of The Revised DIS-IV. In: Harris L, ed. NIDA Research Monograph-Problems of Drug Dependence. Washington, D.C: NIH; 1998.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Williams ML, Freeman RC, Bowen AM, et al. A comparison of the reliability of self-reported drug use and sexual behaviors using computer-assisted versus face-to-face interviewing. AIDS Educ Prev. Jun 2000;12(3):199–213.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Thom DH WS, Guzman D, Wu A, Penko J, Miaskowski C, Kushel M. Physician Trust in the Patient: Development and Validation of a New Measure. Ann Fam Med. in press.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Horton J CW, Cottler L. Assessing Psychiatric Disorders Among Drug Users: Reliability of The Revised DIS-IV. Washington DC: National Institutes of Health; 1998.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nicholson B, Passik SD. Management of chronic noncancer pain in the primary care setting. South Med J. Oct 2007;100(10):1028–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zeger SL, Liang KY. Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes. Biometrics. Mar 1986;42(1):121–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Liang K-Y, Zeger SL. Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika. 1986;73(1):13–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Green AR, Carney DR, Pallin DJ, et al. Implicit bias among physicians and its prediction of thrombolysis decisions for black and white patients. J Gen Intern Med. Sep 2007;22(9):1231–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Chen M, Bargh, JA. Nonconscious behavioral confirmation processes: The self-fulfilling consequences of automatic stereotype activation. J Exp Soc Psychol. 1997;35(5):541–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Devine P. Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1989;56(1):5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wittenbrink B, Judd, C M, Park, B. Evidence for racial prejudice at the implicit level and its relationship with questionnaire measures. J Pers Soc Psychol 1997;72(2):262–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    van Ryn M. Research on the provider contribution to race/ethnicity disparities in medical care. Med Care. Jan 2002;40(1 Suppl):I140-151.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Burgess DJ, van Ryn M, Crowley-Matoka M, Malat J. Understanding the provider contribution to race/ethnicity disparities in pain treatment: insights from dual process models of stereotyping. Pain Med. Mar-Apr 2006;7(2):119–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Burgess DJ. Are providers more likely to contribute to healthcare disparities under high levels of cognitive load? How features of the healthcare setting may lead to biases in medical decision making. Med Decis Making. Mar-Apr 2010;30(2):246–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Chen I, Kurz J, Pasanen M, et al. Racial differences in opioid use for chronic nonmalignant pain. J Gen Intern Med. 2005 Jul 2005;20(7):593–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Dimsdale JE. Stalked by the past: the influence of ethnicity on health. Psychosom Med. Mar-Apr 2000;62(2):161–70.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ng B, Dimsdale JE, Rollnik JD, Shapiro H. The effect of ethnicity on prescriptions for patient-controlled analgesia for post-operative pain. Pain. Jul 1996;66(1):9–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Godin P. Trust built on shared power. Nurs Stand. Nov 26-Dec 2 2008;23(12):62–3.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Thom DH, Ribisl KM, Stewart AL, Luke DA. Further validation and reliability testing of the Trust in Physician Scale. The Stanford Trust Study Physicians. Med Care. May 1999;37(5):510–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Mead N, Bower P. Patient-centredness: a conceptual framework and review of the empirical literature. Soc Sci Med. Oct 2000;51(7):1087–110.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Haas JS, Cook EF, Puopolo AL, Burstin HR, Cleary PD, Brennan TA. Is the professional satisfaction of general internists associated with patient satisfaction? J Gen Intern Med. Feb 2000;15(2):122–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Sabin J, Nosek BA, Greenwald A, Rivara FP. Physicians' implicit and explicit attitudes about race by MD race, ethnicity, and gender. J Health Care Poor Underserved. Aug 2009;20(3):896–913.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Saha S, Komaromy M, Koepsell TD, Bindman AB. Patient-physician racial concordance and the perceived quality and use of health care. Arch Intern Med. May 10 1999;159(9):997–1004.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Starrels JL, Becker WC, Alford DP, Kapoor A, Williams AR, Turner BJ. Systematic review: treatment agreements and urine drug testing to reduce opioid misuse in patients with chronic pain. Ann Intern Med. Jun 1 2010;152(11):712–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Moskowitz
    • 1
  • David H. Thom
    • 2
  • David Guzman
    • 1
  • Joanne Penko
    • 1
  • Christine Miaskowski
    • 3
  • Margot Kushel
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of General Internal MedicineUniversity of California San Francisco/San Francisco General HospitalSan FranciscoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Family & Community MedicineUniversity of California San FranciscoSan FranciscoUSA
  3. 3.Department of Physiological NursingUniversity of California San FranciscoSan FranciscoUSA

Personalised recommendations