Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22327629›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2012

A primary care Symptoms Clinic for patients with medically unexplained symptoms: pilot randomised trial.

Christopher Burton, David Weller, Wendy Marsden, Allison Worth, Michael Sharpe

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02444520 (Persistent Physical Symptoms Reduction Intervention), which is not on this map. Cited by 22 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02444520 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2015, after this paper: background citation

Persistent Physical Symptoms Reduction Intervention: a Systems Change and Evaluation (PRINCE) - Integrated GP Care for Persistent Physical Symptoms: a Feasibility & Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorKing's College LondonRan2015 to 2018Enrolled161ConditionsPersistent Physical SymptomsArmsIntegrated GP Care
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Open Trial of Integrated Primary Care Consultation for Medically Unexplained Symptoms.The journal of behavioral health services & research · 2017
    Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Patients' descriptions of the relation between physical symptoms and negative emotions: a qualitative analysis of primary care consultations.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Pediatric Somatic Symptom Disorders.Current psychiatry reports · 2017
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. CONSORT 2010 statement: extension to randomised pilot and feasibility trials.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2016 · on this map
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Christopher BurtonCentre for Population Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
David Weller
Wendy Marsden
Allison Worth
Michael Sharpe

Funding

Chief Scientist Office CZG/2/412Chief Scientist Office CZP/4/11
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo conduct a pilot trial of a primary care Symptoms Clinic for patients with medically unexplained symptoms and evaluate recruitment and retention, and acceptability of the intervention and to estimate potential treatment effects for a full trial. TRIAL

designRandomised parallel group pilot trial.

settingPrimary care in one locality.

participantsPrimary care database and postal questionnaire were used to identify patients with multiple specialist referrals and multiple physical symptoms unlikely to be explained by disease.

interventionsGeneral practitioner (GP) with special interest 'Symptoms Clinic' + usual care versus usual care alone. The Symptoms Clinic comprised one long (1 h) and three short (20 min) appointments. OUTCOMES: Number of patients identified and recruited; acceptability of the intervention (items from Client Satisfaction Questionnaire and interview); Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form 12 (SF-12) physical component summary. RANDOMISATION: Automated blocked randomisation accessed by telephone. BLINDING: None. NUMBERS RANDOMIZED: 16 to intervention and 16 to usual care alone. RECRUITMENT: 72 patients, from seven GP practices, had repeated specialist referrals and a Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ)-15 score of ≥10 indicating a high probability of medically unexplained symptoms. 15 were ineligible and 25 declined to participate. NUMBERS ANALYSED: 26 patients; two patients randomised to the intervention group were incorrectly included, three patients in the intervention group and one control did not complete outcome measures. OUTCOME: Most patients randomised to the Symptoms Clinic found the intervention acceptable: eight out of 11 reported the intervention helped them to deal with their problems. The mean difference between groups in SF-12 physical component summary, adjusted for baseline, was 3.8 points (SD 6). HARMS: No observed harms.

conclusionsPatients with multiple medically unexplained symptoms can be systematically identified in primary care; a randomised trial comparing the Symptoms Clinic with usual care is feasible and has the potential to show clinically meaningful benefit.

trial registrationISRCTN63083469.

Identifiers

PMID22327629
PMCPMC3330253

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.