ArticleLondon journal of primary care2009
What information do general practitioners expect in letters from mental health services?
Article in London journal of primary care, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Collaboration across the primary and specialist care interface in Early Intervention in Psychosis services: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024Article
- Still room for improvement: standardisation of clinical correspondence and experience in a rural crisis and home treatment service.BJPsych bulletin · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Psychiatrists and General Practitioners (GPs) communicate mainly by letters which often do not cover the necessary information. Setting Barnet PCT Question To identify what GPs regard as important and necessary information in psychiatric follow up letters. Method A postal questionnaire was sent to all GPs in the Borough of Barnet to determine their view on this matter. Results Out of 187 GPs, 129 responded to the questionnaire (69%). A mismatch was found between what psychiatrists write in their follow up letters and what GPs expect. Medication details, diagnosis, name of care coordinator and changes in mental state were considered very important to GPs. Conclusions Conveying information that GPs actually consider important may improve their ability to share care of mental health patients. This may be achievable by introducing standardised format letters.
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.