Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30801664›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of dermatology2019

Insight into the management of actinic keratosis: a qualitative interview study among general practitioners and dermatologists.

E C Noels, M Lugtenberg, S van Egmond, S M Droger, P A J Buis, T Nijsten, M Wakkee

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of dermatology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Yonder: Obesity communication, opioid deprescribing, actinic keratosis, and artificial intelligence.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

E C NoelsDepartment of Dermatology, Erasmus University Medical Centre, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9228-3332
M LugtenbergDepartment of Dermatology, Erasmus University Medical Centre, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
S van EgmondDepartment of Dermatology, Erasmus University Medical Centre, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-1323-4928
S M DrogerDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Centre, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
P A J BuisHealth Care Centre Harderwijk (Gezondheidscentrum Harderwijk), Johanniterlaan 3, 3841 AT, Harderwijk, the Netherlands.
T NijstenDepartment of Dermatology, Erasmus University Medical Centre, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9940-2875
M WakkeeDepartment of Dermatology, Erasmus University Medical Centre, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8578-901X
Erasmus University Rotterdam · NLVolandis · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe increasing incidence of actinic keratosis (AK) is causing a large burden on healthcare systems. The current management of patients with AK seems to vary within and between primary and secondary care; however, an in-depth understanding of healthcare providers' management of AK is currently lacking.

objectivesTo gain insight into the management of AK by exploring the underlying motives of current practices among general practitioners (GPs) and dermatologists in the Netherlands.

methodsA qualitative study was conducted consisting of semistructured individual interviews with 22 GPs and 18 dermatologists focusing on the underlying motives regarding AK management. A predefined topic list was used. All interviews were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim and inductively analysed by two researchers drawing on elements of grounded theory.

resultsGPs reported conducting limited proactive clinical assessments of cutaneous photodamage due to a perceived lack of value, varying in their method of diagnosing AK. They mainly applied cryotherapy or referred to secondary care due to lack of experience, varying in their applications and providing mostly patient-driven follow-up care. They also reported a great need for guidelines due to a lack of knowledge of AK management. Dermatologists indicated pursuing proactive clinical assessments of cutaneous photodamage and the goal of providing guideline-driven AK care. However, patient preferences still largely influence both treatment choices and follow-up regimens. Furthermore, dermatologists reported the need to improve AK and skin cancer management in primary care.

conclusionsFor AK care to become more standardized and uniform in Dutch primary care, the implementation of guidelines and (continuing) education are needed to address the commonly reported barriers of lack of value, experience and knowledge among GPs. For efficient use of care among dermatologists, shared decision-making tools along with adequate (framing of) patient information may be useful.

Indexed as

AdultClinical Decision-MakingDecision Making, SharedDermatologistsDermatologyEducation, Medical, ContinuingFemaleGeneral PractitionersHumansKeratosis, ActinicMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsPhysicians, Primary CarePractice Guidelines as TopicPractice Patterns, Physicians'

Identifiers

PMID30801664
PMCPMC6849726
OpenAlexW2915852203

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.