Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24231459›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2013

What happens when patients know more than their doctors? Experiences of health interactions after diabetes patient education: a qualitative patient-led study.

Rosamund Snow, Charlotte Humphrey, Jane Sandall

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

50 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 104 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. #TreatmentResistantDepression: A qualitative content analysis of Tweets about difficult-to-treat depression.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Long Covid - The illness narratives.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2021
    Article
  19. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rosamund SnowPatient Safety and Service Quality Research Centre, King's College London, London, UK.
Charlotte Humphrey
Jane Sandall
King's College London · GB

Funding

Department of Health NIHR-PSSQRF-004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo explore the impact of patient education on the lives of people with diabetes, including the effect on interactions with doctors and other healthcare professionals.

designQualitative user-led study using longitudinal interviews and 146 h of participant observation. Data were analysed using a narrative approach.

participants21 patients with type 1 diabetes, those either about to attend a patient education course or those who had completed the course in the previous 10 years.

settingEstablished patient education centres in three UK teaching hospitals teaching the Dose Adjustment for Normal Eating (DAFNE) course.

resultsBoth postcourse and several years later, most participants spoke of the experience of taking part in education as life-changingly positive. It helped them understand how to gain control over a very complex disease and freed them from dependence on medical advice and restrictive regimes. However, interactions within the health system following patient education could be fraught. Participants emerged from the course with greater condition-specific knowledge than many of the healthcare professionals they encountered. When these professionals did not understand what their patients were trying to do and were uncomfortable trusting their expertise, there could be serious consequences for these patients' ability to continue effective self-management.

conclusionsPatients who have in-depth knowledge of their condition encounter problems when their expertise is seen as inappropriate in standard healthcare interactions, and expertise taught to patients in one branch of medicine can be considered non-compliant by those who are not specialists in that field. Although patient education can give people confidence in their own self-management skills, it cannot solve the power imbalance that remains when a generalist healthcare professional, however well meaning, blocks access to medication and supplies needed to manage chronic diseases successfully. There is a role for those involved in primary and hospital care, including those supporting and training healthcare professionals, to recognise these problems and find ways to acknowledge and respect chronic patients' biomedical and practical expertise.

Indexed as

Medical Education & TrainingPrimary Care

Identifiers

PMID24231459
PMCPMC3831109
OpenAlexW2148228184

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.