ArticleBMJ open2012
Case stories in general practice: a focus group study.
Article in BMJ open, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychiatry peer review groups in Australia: a mixed-methods exploration of structure and function.BMJ open · 2020Article
- Burdened parents sharing their concerns for their children with the doctor.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2019Article
- Helpful strategies for GPs seeing patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms: a focus group study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2017Article
- Article
- Physical education Teachers' and public health Nurses' perception of Norwegian high school Students' participation in physical education - a focus group study.BMC public health · 2015Article
- To give the invisible child priority: children as next of kin in general practice.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo explore the interactive process of sharing case stories in small-group activity in general practice.
designQualitative focus group study.
settingPeer-group meetings of doctors attending specialist training or continuous medical education in general practice.
participantsTwenty female and 30 male doctors working in general practice in Norway.
resultsThe storyline of case presentations included detailed stories with emotional engagement, co-authored by other group members. The stories initiated discussions and reflections concerning patients' and doctors' perspectives, medical ethics as well as clinical problems. The safe atmosphere allowed testing out boundaries of socially shared knowledge.
conclusionsSharing case stories in small groups in general practice initiated interaction that facilitated meaning-making, reflection and peer support.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.