Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24771914›Full record

ArticleGeburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde2013

S3 Guideline "Management of Patients with Non-Specific, Functional and Somatoform Physical Complaints" - What is Important for Gynaecological Practice?

F Siedentopf, C Hausteiner-Wiehle

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

F SiedentopfMartin-Luther-Krankenhaus, Frauenklinik, Berlin.
C Hausteiner-WiehleBerufsgenossenschaftliche Klinik Murnau, Klinik und Poliklinik für Psychosomatische Medizin der Technischen Universität, München.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When the guideline was compiled, the available evidence was heterogeneous; the evidence varied depending on the subject addressed and was often of only moderate quality. Nevertheless, a strong consensus was reached on almost all subjects. It is recommended that physicians develop a collaborative working relationship with the patient, focus on symptoms and coping strategies and avoid making stigmatising comments. A biopsychosocial diagnostic evaluation with a sensitive discussion of the signs of psychosocial stress allows problems of this type and co-morbid conditions to be recognised early on and reduces the risk of iatrogenic somatisation. In uncomplicated cases, establishing a biopsychosocial explanatory model and physical/social activation are recommended. More serious cases call for collaborative, coordinated management with regular appointments (as opposed to ad-hoc appointments when the patient feels worse), gradual activation and psychotherapy. The comprehensive treatment plan can be multimodal and can potentially include physical management strategies, relaxation techniques and antidepressants.

Indexed as

chronic pelvic pain in womengynaecologyprimary psychosomatic caresomatoform physical complaints

Identifiers

PMID24771914
PMCPMC3964376

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.