Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31064744›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2019

Identifying and managing concerns about GPs in England: an interview study and case-series analysis.

Abigail Tazzyman, Marie Bryce, Kieran Walshe, Alan Boyd

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

4 authors.

Abigail TazzymanAlliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester.
Marie BrycePlymouth University, Plymouth.
Kieran WalsheAlliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester.
Alan BoydAlliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUnderperforming doctors have been the focus of sustained interest from the media, policymakers, and researchers. GPs are more likely to be the subject of a complaint than any other type of doctor in the UK, and the management of concerns in primary care needs improvement, yet more is known about how concerns are managed in secondary care.

aimAlthough formal policies for NHS England's management of concerns are clear, little is known about how these are put into practice. This study explores how concerns are identified, investigated, and managed at a regional level. DESIGN AND

settingA qualitative study of the management of concerns in primary care across eight area teams.

methodThe study comprised two main strands: in-depth interviews with NHS England staff; and the analysis of case file data.

resultsThe process for raising concerns was identified as inconsistent and disparate, with potential weaknesses to address. The concerns process was flexible. A trade-off between adaptability and consistency was evident, but the correct balance of the two is difficult to establish. Performance concerns were most common, followed by behaviour. Conduct was the next most frequently raised concern, and a small number of health cases were identified. Outcomes of cases appeared to be dependent on the doctor's engagement and response rather than necessarily the nature of a concern or the consequences of a doctor's actions.

conclusionThe way practices handle complaints and concerns remains unexamined, even though they are a key route for patient complaints.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceCommunicationMedical ErrorsProfessional MisconductEnglandGeneral PractitionersHumansPhysician ImpairmentProfessional CompetenceQualitative ResearchState Medicinecomplaintsgeneral practitionersmanaging concernspatient safetyquality of care

Identifiers

PMID31064744
PMCPMC6592338

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.