Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26898982›Full record

ArticleClinical rheumatology2016

Knowledge, illness perceptions and stated clinical practice behaviour in management of gout: a mixed methods study in general practice.

Bart Spaetgens, Tobias Pustjens, Lieke E J M Scheepers, Hein J E M Janssens, Sjef van der Linden, Annelies Boonen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. [Development and clinical application of the health education knowledge assessment questionnaire for gout].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. A glance into the future of gout.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2022
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

6 authors.

Bart SpaetgensDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P.O. Box 5800, 6202 AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands. bartholomeus.spaetgens@mumc.nl.
Tobias PustjensDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P.O. Box 5800, 6202 AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Lieke E J M ScheepersDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P.O. Box 5800, 6202 AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Hein J E M JanssensDepartment of Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Sjef van der LindenDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P.O. Box 5800, 6202 AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Annelies BoonenDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P.O. Box 5800, 6202 AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective of the present study is to explore knowledge, illness perceptions and stated practice behaviour in relation to gout in primary care. This is a mixed methods study among 32 general practitioners (GPs). The quantitative assessment included the Gout Knowledge Questionnaire (GKQ; range 0-10; better) and Brief Illness Perceptions Questionnaire (BIPQ; nine items, range 0-10; stronger). Structured individual interviews obtained further qualitative insight into knowledge and perceptions, in the context of daily practice. Among 32 GPs, 18 (56.3 %) were male, mean age 44.4 years (SD 9.6) and mean working experience 17.1 years (SD 9.7). Median score [interquartile ranges (IQR)] on the GKQ was 7.8 [6.7-8.9] and 9.0 [8.0-10.0], when presented as open or multiple-choice questions, respectively. The BIPQ (median; [IQR]) revealed that gout was seen as a chronic disease (8.0; [7.0-9.0]), affecting life and emotions moderately (6.5; [5.0-7.0]), having many severe symptoms (8.0; [7.0-9.0]) and in which treatment could be very helpful (8.0; [7.0-9.0]). Further interviews revealed large variation in specific aspects of knowledge and about gaps concerning indications for uric acid-lowering therapy (UALT), duration of UALT, target serum uric acid (sUA) level or duration of prophylactic treatment. Finally, patients' adherence was not checked systematically. Specific knowledge gaps and discrepancies between perceptions and stated practice behaviour were identified, which might hamper effective management of this well-treatable disease. Improving evidence on the rationale and effectiveness of treatment targets and adherence interventions, tailoring guidelines to general practice and intensification of implementation of guidelines in primary health care seem to be needed.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticePractice Patterns, Physicians'AdultDisease ManagementFemaleGeneral PracticeGeneral PractitionersGoutHumansMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsPrimary Health CareSurveys and QuestionnairesUric AcidUric AcidAttitudesGout Knowledge QuestionnaireHealth beliefsIllness perceptionsPrimary care

Identifiers

PMID26898982
PMCPMC4960270

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.