Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31662317›Full record

ArticleBJGP open2019

Exploring how patients respond to GP recommendations for mental health treatment: an analysis of communication in primary care consultations.

Joseph Ford, Felicity Thomas, Richard Byng, Rose McCabe

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJGP open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Joseph FordPostdoctoral Research Associate, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, UK j.w.ford@exeter.ac.uk.
Felicity ThomasSenior Research Fellow, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter Medical School, St Luke's Campus, Exeter, UK.
Richard ByngProfessor of Primary Care Research, Community and Primary Care Research Group, University of Plymouth, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Plymouth Science Park, Plymouth, UK.
Rose McCabeProfessor of Clinical Communication, School of Health Sciences, City, University of London, London, UK.
University of Exeter · GBRMIT University · AUUniversity of Plymouth · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient take-up and adherence to antidepressants and talking therapy is low. However, little is known about how GPs recommend these treatments and whether patients accept them.

aimTo examine how GPs recommend antidepressants and talking therapy, and how patients respond. DESIGN &

settingA total of 52 recorded primary care consultations for depression, anxiety, and stress were analysed.

methodUsing a standardised coding scheme, five ways doctors recommend treatment were coded, conveying varying authority and endorsement. The treatment recommendation types were as follows: more directive pronouncements (I'll start you on X); proposals (How about we start X?); less directive suggestions (Would you like to try X?); offers (Do you want me to give you X?); and assertions (There are medications that might help). It was also coded whether patients accepted, passively resisted (for example, withholding response), or actively resisted (for example, I've tried that before).

resultsA total of 33 recommendations occurred in 23 consultations. In two-thirds of cases, GPs treated the patient as primary decision-maker by using suggestions, offers, or assertions. In one-third of cases, they used more directive pronouncements or proposals. GPs endorsed treatment moderately (67%), weakly (18%), or strongly (15%). Only one-quarter of recommendations were accepted immediately. Patients cited fears about medication side effects and/or dependency, group therapy, and doubts about treatment efficacy. Despite three-quarters of patients resisting, 76% got prescriptions or self-referral information for talking therapy.

conclusionInitially, GPs treat patients as the decision-maker. However, although patients resist, most end up with treatment. This may impact negatively on treatment uptake and success. Social prescribing may fill a treatment gap for some patients.

Indexed as

general practicemental healthpatientsprimary health careresearch methods (other)social sciences

Identifiers

PMID31662317
PMCPMC6995855
OpenAlexW2982360295

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.