ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2015
Understanding depression associated with chronic physical illness: a Q-methodology study in primary care.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Application of Q-methodology in chronic disease research: a scoping review.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
- The effect of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy on PTSD and depression symptoms in trauma-exposed black adults: Pilot randomized controlled trial results.Journal of mood and anxiety disorders · 2024Article
- Connect-ROD - development and qualitative evaluation of a community-based group intervention to support well-being in patients with a rare or orphan disease.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2024Article
- Improving recognition of anxiety and depression in rheumatoid arthritis: a qualitative study in a community clinic.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2017Article
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
backgroundDetection of depression can be difficult in primary care, particularly when associated with chronic illness. Patient beliefs may affect detection and subsequent engagement with management. Q-methodology can help to identify viewpoints that are likely to influence either clinical practice or policy intervention.
aimTo identify socially shared viewpoints of comorbid depression, and characterise key overlaps and discrepancies. DESIGN AND
settingA Q-methodology study of patients registered with general practices or community clinics in Leeds, UK.
methodPatients with coronary heart disease or diabetes and depression from three practices and community clinics were invited to participate. Participants ranked 57 statements about comorbid depression. Factor analyses were undertaken to identify independent accounts, and additional interview data were used to support interpretation.
resultsThirty-one patients participated; 13 (42%) had current symptoms of depression. Five accounts towards comorbid depression were identified: overwhelmed resources; something medical or within me; a shameful weakness; part of who I am; and recovery-orientated. The main differences in attitudes related to the cause of depression and its relationship with the patient's chronic illness, experience of shame, and whether medical interventions would help recovery.
conclusionThere are groups of patients who do not perceive a relationship between their depression and chronic illness; they may not understand the intention behind policy initiatives to identify depression during chronic illness reviews. Tailoring detection strategies for depression to take account of different clusters of attitudes and beliefs could help improve identification and personalise management.
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.