Challenging history taking encounters: a systematic review, meta-analysis and phenomenological framework

OBJECTIVES: All physicians will experience challenging history taking encounters, where communication is impaired and negatively impacts the diagnostic process. The aims of this systematic review were to (1) undertake a meta-analysis of the frequency of challenging encounters; (2) collate adverse outcomes of challenging encounters; (3) identify underlying causes of challenging encounters; (4) identify strategies to deal with different challenges; and (5) align these strategies with our published phenomenological framework of history taking challenges. DESIGN: This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence data adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses and the Meta-analyses of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. DATA SOURCES: A literature search in MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases was performed on 12 July 2020, and updated on 4 August 2025, focusing on challenging history taking encounters in any clinical setting. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Articles reporting on the frequency, adverse outcomes, causative factors or strategies used to address challenges in the history taking process in any clinical area of medicine. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: as tests for heterogeneity and funnel plot with Egger's test for publication bias. RESULTS: 73 articles were included in the analysis. The overall prevalence of challenging history taking encounters was 19.5% (95% CI 14.2% to 24.7%). Adverse outcomes of patient dissatisfaction (level 1 evidence) and diagnostic uncertainty (level 3 evidence) were identified. Factors associated with (n=22) and strategies to mitigate challenging encounters (n=13) were categorised. Correlation of factors and strategies with a phenomenological approach created a framework to assist novice history takers in approaching such circumstances. CONCLUSIONS: Challenging history taking encounters are common. Little is known of the relative importance of factors associated with challenging history taking encounters or the impact of suggested strategies. Many of the suggested strategies to facilitate meaningful communication in these situations involve a departure from standard history taking. More research is required to better define the nature of challenges encountered in history taking with a view to develop better educational models for trainee physicians.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMJ Open
Published
2026-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2025-115891
Primary Topic
Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Challenging history taking encounters: a systematic review, meta-analysis and phenomenological framework

Lisa Amey, Sabrina Hossain, Simon Broadley, Gerben Keijzers et al.
BMJ Open
Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
article

Challenging history taking encounters: a systematic review, meta-analysis and phenomenological framework

Lisa Amey, Sabrina Hossain, Simon Broadley, Gerben Keijzers, Andrew Teodorczuk, Anna Uridge, Harry McConnell, Ranudi Dias, Jing Sun, Araz M Jassem, Jessica Clarke, Kate Murray, Sufi Sharma, Jasmin Somers
article en

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: All physicians will experience challenging history taking encounters, where communication is impaired and negatively impacts the diagnostic process. The aims of this systematic review were to (1) undertake a meta-analysis of the frequency of challenging encounters; (2) collate adverse outcomes of challenging encounters; (3) identify underlying causes of challenging encounters; (4) identify strategies to deal with different challenges; and (5) align these strategies with our published phenomenological framework of history taking challenges. DESIGN: This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of prevalence data adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses and the Meta-analyses of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. DATA SOURCES: A literature search in MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases was performed on 12 July 2020, and updated on 4 August 2025, focusing on challenging history taking encounters in any clinical setting. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Articles reporting on the frequency, adverse outcomes, causative factors or strategies used to address challenges in the history taking process in any clinical area of medicine. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: as tests for heterogeneity and funnel plot with Egger's test for publication bias. RESULTS: 73 articles were included in the analysis. The overall prevalence of challenging history taking encounters was 19.5% (95% CI 14.2% to 24.7%). Adverse outcomes of patient dissatisfaction (level 1 evidence) and diagnostic uncertainty (level 3 evidence) were identified. Factors associated with (n=22) and strategies to mitigate challenging encounters (n=13) were categorised. Correlation of factors and strategies with a phenomenological approach created a framework to assist novice history takers in approaching such circumstances. CONCLUSIONS: Challenging history taking encounters are common. Little is known of the relative importance of factors associated with challenging history taking encounters or the impact of suggested strategies. Many of the suggested strategies to facilitate meaningful communication in these situations involve a departure from standard history taking. More research is required to better define the nature of challenges encountered in history taking with a view to develop better educational models for trainee physicians.

BMJ OpenVol. 16(4)
Griffith University (AU), Bond University (AU), Charles Sturt University (AU), Gold Coast Hospital (AU), Holy Spirit Northside Private Hospital (AU), Prince Charles Hospital (AU)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 24%
Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.