ArticleScandinavian journal of primary health care2014
Healthcare utilization in general practice before and after psychological treatment: a follow-up data linkage study in primary care.
Article in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Longitudinal pharmacoepidemiological and health services research for substance users in treatment: protocol of the Belgian TDI-IMA linkage.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2018Article
- A Patient-Centered Approach to a Rural General Practice in Distress and the Search for a Solution.The Permanente journal · 2018Article
- The diagnosis of depression and its treatment in Canadian primary care practices: an epidemiological study.CMAJ open · 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
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveLiterature suggests that serious mental health problems increase the use of health services and psychological interventions can reduce this effect. This study investigates whether this effect is also found in primary care patients with less serious mental health problems. DESIGN/
settingRoutine electronic health records (EHR) from a representative sample of 128 general practices were linked to patient files from 150 primary care psychologists participating in the NIVEL Primary Care Database, using a trusted third party. Data were linked using the date of birth, gender, and postcode. This yielded 503 unique data pairs that were listed in one of the participating GP practices in 2008-2010, for people who had psychological treatment from a psychologist that ended in 2009.
main outcome measuresThe number of contacts, health problems presented, and prescribed medication in general practice were analysed before and after the psychological treatment.
resultsNearly all 503 patients consulted their GP during the six months preceding the psychological treatment (90.9%) and also in the six months after this treatment had ended (83.7%). The frequency of contacts was significantly higher before than after the psychological treatment (6.1 vs. 4.8). Fewer patients contacted their GPs specifically for psychological or social problems (46.3% vs. 38.8%) and fewer patients had anxiolytic drug prescriptions (15.5% vs. 7.6%) after psychological treatment.
conclusionAfter psychological treatment, patients contact their GPs less often and present fewer psychological or social problems. Although contact rates seem to decrease, clients of psychologists are still frequent GP attenders.
Indexed as
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.