ArticleBMC family practice2016
Recognition of patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms by family physicians: results of a focus group study.
Article in BMC family practice, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Behavioural modification interventions for medically unexplained symptoms in primary care: systematic reviews and economic evaluation.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2020Pooled it
- Care needs of patients with the post-COVID syndrome in Dutch general practice: an interview study among patients and general practitioners.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Awareness of somatisation disorder among Swedish physicians at emergency departments: a cross-sectional survey.BMC psychiatry · 2024Article
- Article
- Medical educators' experiences on medically unexplained symptoms and intercultural communication-an expert focus group study.BMC medical education · 2022Article
- The Careful Assessment Tool for Managing Patients with Medically Unexplained Symptoms - the Experience of Slovenian Family Medicine Trainees: a Qualitative Study.Zdravstveno varstvo · 2022Article
- Characteristics and economic burden of frequent attenders with medically unexplained symptoms in primary care in Israel.The European journal of general practice · 2021Observational
- Development and User Experiences of a Biopsychosocial Interprofessional Online Course on Persistent Somatic Symptoms.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
- Development of Grip self-help: An online patient-tailored self-help intervention for functional somatic symptoms in primary care.Internet interventions · 2020Article
- Medically unexplained symptoms: time to and triggers for diagnosis in primary care consultations.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020Article
- Article
- Between illness and disease: Reflections on managing medically unexplained symptoms.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2018Article
- How general practitioners understand and handle medically unexplained symptoms: a focus group study.BMC family practice · 2018Article
- Is uncertain vulvovaginal candidiasis a marker of vulvodynia? A study in a Dutch general practice research database.BJGP open · 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
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) form a heterogeneous group and frequently attend their family physician (FP). Little is known about how FPs recognize MUPS in their patients. We conducted a focus group study to explore how FPs recognize MUPS and whether they recognize specific subgroups of patients with MUPS. Targeting such subgroups might improve treatment outcomes.
methodsSix focus groups were conducted with in total 29 Dutch FPs. Two researchers independently analysed the data applying the principles of constant comparative analysis in order to detect characteristics to recognize MUPS and to synthesize subgroups.
resultsFPs take into account various characteristics when recognizing MUPS in their patients. More objective characteristics were multiple MUPS, frequent and long consultations and many referrals. Subjective characteristics were negative feelings towards patients and the feeling that the FP cannot make sense of the patient's story. Experience of the FP, affinity with MUPS, consultation skills, knowledge of the patient's context and the doctor-patient relationship seemed to influence how and to what extent these characteristics play a role. Based on the perceptions of the FPs we were able to distinguish five subgroups of patients according to FPs: 1) the anxious MUPS patient, 2) the unhappy MUPS patient, 3) the passive MUPS patient, 4) the distressed MUPS patient, and 5) the puzzled MUPS patient. These subgroups were not mutually exclusive, but were based on how explicit and predominant certain characteristics were perceived by FPs.
conclusionsFPs believe that they can properly identify MUPS in their patients during consultations and five distinct subgroups of patients could be distinguished. If these subgroups can be confirmed in further research, personalized treatment strategies can be developed and tested for their effectiveness.
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.