## 3 Results: Medical History-Taking Challenges
### Observation 2: More than 80% of Physicians Encounter History-Taking Challenges  
A Likert scale question asked the respondents to quantify the challenges they encountered during history taking (i.e., question RQ2). It revealed that 1.92% indicated \"(1) never\", 9.62% \"(2) almost never\", 52.88% \"(3) occasionally/sometimes\", 29.81% \"(4) almost every time\", and 5.77% \"(5) every time\". This led to an overall **88.46%** experiencing challenges occasionally, almost every time, or every time. The statistical analysis of these responses disclosed a mean Likert scale score of 3.28, denoting that, on average, participants encountered challenges primarily at an \"Occasionally/Sometimes\" level. Furthermore, the median, recorded at 3.00, signifies that half of the responses reported challenges at this level or lower, illustrating a balanced distribution. Additionally, the standard deviation of 0.7900 indicates a relatively minor variance from the mean, suggesting a consistent level of challenges encountered during history taking among the participants.  
Furthermore, we inquired about respondents' perceptions regarding the level of efficiency of their workplaces in facilitating patient history taking. The Likert scale question answering options were: \"(5) very good\"; \"(4) good\"; \"(3) acceptable\"; \"(2) poor\"; and \"(1) very poor\". The findings indicated that 46.15% physicians found it \"acceptable\", 30.77% rated it as good (4, 5), and 23.07 rated it as poor (1, 2). These findings indicate that physicians and their organizations are both facing challenges in history-taking issues.  
A correlation matrix was produced to assess the significance of factors affecting doctors' challenges in history taking. The factors are listed in Table 2, and the question items mentioned in Section 2.2. Figure 2 displays the selected variables for analysis, excluding (Q4, Q5, Q7, Q10, Q11, Q12, Q13, Q19, Q22) due to high one-hot encoding correlation. The highest correlation (0.51) between Q7 and Q8 led to the removal of Q7 from the ordinal regression model, resulting in improved performance with Q8. Subsequently, an ordinal regression model was trained to evaluate the impact of independent variables on history-taking challenges.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Factors** & **Coef** & **Std Err** & **z** & **p \textgreater{} z** \\ \hline Q1 & 0.1955 & 0.304 & 0.644 & 0.520 \\ \hline
**Q2** & \(\mathbf{-0.0406}\) & **0.015** & \(\mathbf{-2.736}\) & **0.006** \\ \hline Q3 & \(-0.1830\) & 0.103 & \(-1.775\  
Table 2 includes coefficients, standard errors, z-values, and p-values for each variable. Statistical significance was observed for 'work discipline' (Q2), and 'workload' (Q9), respectively. This suggests that these factors have a notable impact on the challenges of history taking. 'Experience' (Q3) and 'patients seen per day' (Q6) approached significance with p-values of 0.076 and 0.088, indicating potential but not definitive impacts. Other variables, such as 'gender' (Q1), 'actual hours worked' (Q8), and 'time spent history taking' (Q14), showed higher p-values, indicating that they are less likely to have a statistically significant impact on the challenges faced in history taking.