However, the strength of this study is its contemporary and parallel assessment of patient and physician views, which offer a unique opportunity to examine gaps and differences in understanding between these groups.
Our study suggests that lower income patients may have a different preference for resources for aiding understanding of discharge instructions, and further research is needed to confirm these findings, explore the reasons behind their preferences, and determine whether interventions addressing these needs mitigate the difference in understanding between low- and high-income patients.
That said, where statistical significance and relative characterisation (eg, highest in variable WX and Y and lowest in variable Z) are important in understanding between-group differences, the more salient question is whether these four groups are clinically relevant in terms of specific sleep treatments in patients with CFS.
The extent to which parents comprehend the complex issues inherent in clinical WES when they consent to their child's participation (and are not simply agreeing to participate in the hope that clinically relevant information can be obtained) and whether differences in understanding exist between the parents who agree or decline to have their child participate in the study remain unclear.
This could explore differences in understanding and experience between doctors and their patients, and highlight how diagnostic thinking develops.
Other studies have examined the challenges that researchers in clinical trials may face in sharing information, such as differences in understanding or power between members of the public and researchers [ 27– 31].
The main points mentioned in this study are differences in understanding of disease between doctors and patients, surprise at the role of the Norwegian GPs, insufficient understanding of information about the RGP scheme and a sense of receiving a lower standard of care among non-European informants.
As there were two main categories of participants in the study; professionals and non-professionals as well as those who had participated in and conducted research, we compared the responses to following three questions to identify differences in understanding or perceptions between the groups.
For example, the clinical encounter is a situation where dialogue may be impeded for a host of reasons, including social structural factors, and differences in understanding of disease processes between patient and clinician [ 4].
