Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Bringing narratives from physicians, patients and caregivers together: a scoping review of published research
  1. Tracy Moniz1,
  2. John Costella2,
  3. Maryam Golafshani3,
  4. Chris Watling4,
  5. Lorelei Lingard4
  1. 1 Communication Studies, Mount Saint Vincent University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
  2. 2 Allyn & Betty Taylor Library, Natural Science Centre, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada
  3. 3 Centre for the Study of Theory and Criticism, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada
  4. 4 Centre for Education Research and Innovation, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada
  1. Correspondence to Dr Tracy Moniz, Communication Studies, Mount Saint Vincent University, Halifax, NS B3M 2J6, Canada; Tracy.Moniz{at}


Patients and family caregivers tell different stories about their illness and care experiences than their physicians do. Better understanding of the relationships among these narratives could offer insight into intersections and disconnections in patient, caregiver and physician perceptions of illness and care. Such understanding could support enhanced patient-centred care in medical education and practice. Narrative writing is increasingly common among physicians, patients and caregivers and uniquely positioned to reveal matters of concern to these groups. We conducted a scoping review to identify literature in which first-person narratives from more than one group (physicians, patients and/or caregivers) were considered as ‘data’. A search strategy involving nine databases located 6337 citations. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts. Full-text screening followed (n=82), along with handsearching of grey literature and bibliographies. Of these, 22 met inclusion criteria. Most pieces analysed narratives by patients and caregivers (n=13), followed by patients, caregivers and physicians (n=7) and patients and physicians (n=2). Only nine pieces compared perspectives among any of these groups. The rest combined narratives for analysis, largely patient and caregiver stories (n=12). Most of the 22 papers used descriptive content analysis to derive themes. Themes of humanity, identity, agency and communication intersect between groups but often manifest in unique ways. What is absent, however, is a more interpretive narrative analysis of structure, orientation and characterisation within these narratives, which may reveal even more than their content. This scoping review offers a cautionary tale of lost potential. Many narratives are gathered and analysed but usually only thematically and rarely comparatively. We call for researchers to explore the potential of comparative analysis and the power of narrative inquiry in the field. Comparative narrative analysis may enrich understanding of how differences between perspectives come to be and what they mean for the experience of illness and care.

  • review
  • narrative
  • physician
  • patient
  • caregiver
  • analysis

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


  • Contributors All listed authors have met the ICMJE criteria for authorship. TM, JC, CW and LL were involved in the conception and design of the research. TM, JC and MG contributed to the acquisition of data. TM, MG, CW and LL contributed to the analysis and interpretation of data for the work. TM reported the research, and all authors were involved in revising the work. TM is responsible for the overall content as guarantor.

  • Funding This study was funded by a Mapping the Landscape, Journeying Together grant from the Arnold P. Gold Foundation.

  • Competing interests This project was made possible with a Mapping the Landscape, Journeying Together grant from the Arnold P. Gold Foundation.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.