ArticleBMC family practice2018
How general practitioners understand and handle medically unexplained symptoms: a focus group study.
Article in BMC family practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring delay to diagnosis of endometriosis, a healthcare professional perspective.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Article
- Discovering strengths in patients with medically unexplained symptoms - a focus group study with general practitioners.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2022Article
- Knowing the entire story - a focus group study on patient experiences with chronic Lyme-associated symptoms (chronic Lyme disease).BMC primary care · 2022Article
- Development and validation of the scale for measuring biopsychosocial approach of family physicians to their patients.Family medicine and community health · 2022Article
- 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
- Making sense of symptoms, clinicians and systems: a qualitative evaluation of a facilitated support group for patients with medically unexplained symptoms.BMC family practice · 2021Article
- Diagnostic and treatment barriers to persistent somatic symptoms in primary care - representative survey with physicians.BMC family practice · 2021Article
- Complex return to work process - caseworkers' experiences of facilitating return to work for individuals on sick leave due to musculoskeletal disorders.BMC public health · 2020Article
- The social life of self-harm in general practice.Social theory & health : STH · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedically unexplained symptoms (MUS) are a common yet challenging encounter in primary care. The aim of this study was to explore how general practitioners (GPs) understand and handle MUS.
methodsThree focus group interviews were conducted with a total of 23 GPs. Participants with varied clinical experience were purposively recruited. The data were analysed thematically, using the concept of framing as an analytical lens.
resultsThe GPs alternated between a biomedical frame, centred on disease, and a biopsychosocial frame, centred on the sick person. Each frame shaped the GPs' understanding and handling of MUS. The biomedical frame emphasised the lack of objective evidence, problematized subjective patient testimony, and manifested feelings of uncertainty, doubt and powerlessness. This in turn complicated patient handling. In contrast, the biopsychosocial frame emphasised clinical experience, turned patient testimony into a valuable source of information, and manifested feelings of confidence and competence. This in turn made them feel empowered. The GPs with the least experience relied more on the biomedical frame, whereas their more seasoned seniors relied mostly on the biopsychosocial frame.
conclusionThe biopsychosocial frame helps GPs to understand and handle MUS better than the biomedical frame does. Medical students should spend more time learning biopsychosocial medicine, and to integrate the clinical knowledge of their peers with their own.
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.