ArticleBMC family practice2016
Uncertainty in clinical practice - an interview study with Swedish GPs on patients with sore throat.
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 10 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Point-of-care tests to manage acute respiratory tract infections in primary care: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis of healthcare professional and patient views.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2025Pooled it
- Outcomes of guidelines from health technology assessment organizations in community-based primary care: a systematic mixed studies review.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2024Pooled it
- Moderators uncertainty tolerance (UT) in healthcare: a systematic review.Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice · 2023Pooled it
- Antibiotic prescribing for acute respiratory tract infections in primary care: an updated and expanded meta-ethnography.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018Pooled it
- Factors influencing antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections in primary care - a comparison of physicians with different antibiotic prescribing rates.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2024Article
- Pharmacists' perspectives and attitudes towards the 2021 down-scheduling of melatonin in Australia using the Theoretical Domains Framework: a mixed-methods study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2023Article
- Role of multidimensional factors in the diagnosis and treatment of tonsillopharyngitis in primary care: a qualitative study.BMC primary care · 2022Article
- Long-term impact of an intervention on rapid antigen detection tests in acute pharyngitis.Atencion primaria · 2020Article
- Article
- Antibiotic knowledge, attitudes and behaviours of Albanian health care professionals and patients - a qualitative interview study.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUncertainty is inevitable in clinical practice in primary care and tolerance for uncertainty and concern for bad outcomes has been shown to vary between physicians. Uncertainty is a factor for inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. Evidence-based guidelines as well as near-patient tests are suggested tools to decrease uncertainty in the management of patients with respiratory tract infections. The aim of this paper was to describe strategies for coping with uncertainty in patients with pharyngotonsillitis in relation to guidelines.
methodsAn interview study was conducted among a strategic sample of 25 general practitioners (GPs).
resultsAll GPs mentioned potential dangerous differential diagnoses and complications. Four strategies for coping with uncertainty were identified, one of which was compliant with guidelines, "Adherence to guidelines", and three were idiosyncratic: "Clinical picture and C-reactive protein (CRP)", "Expanded control", and "Unstructured". The residual uncertainty differed for the different strategies: in the strategy "Adherence to guidelines" and "Clinical picture and CRP" uncertainty was avoided, based either on adherence to guidelines or on the clinical picture and near-patient CRP; in the strategy "Expanded control" uncertainty was balanced based on expanded control; and in the strategy "Unstructured" uncertainty prevailed in spite of redundant examination and anamnesis.
conclusionThe majority of the GPs avoided uncertainty and deemed they had no problems. Their strategies either adhered to guidelines or comprised excessive use of tests. Thus use of guidelines as well as use of more near-patient tests seemed associated to reduced uncertainty, although the later strategy at the expense of compliance to guidelines. A few GPs did not manage to cope with uncertainty or had to put in excessive work to control uncertainty.
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.