Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31864309›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2019

How older patients prioritise their multiple health problems: a qualitative study.

Ulrike Junius-Walker, Tanja Schleef, Ulrike Vogelsang, Marie-Luise Dierks

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. A Qualitative Study to Explore the Influence of Condition Prioritisation in People With Coexisting Diabetes and Hypertension on Medication Adherence.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Older Adults' Experiences and Expectations of Doctor-Patient Interactions During Early Hospital Care.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Observational
  14. 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.

Ulrike Junius-WalkerInstitute of General Practice, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany. Junius-walker.ulrike@mh-hannover.de.ORCID 0000-0002-0250-9885
Tanja SchleefInstitute of General Practice, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
Ulrike VogelsangInstitute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health Systems Research, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
Marie-Luise DierksInstitute for Epidemiology, Social Medicine and Health Systems Research, Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatients with multimorbidity often receive diverse treatments; they are subjected to polypharmacy and to a high treatment burden. Hence it is advocated that doctors set individual health and treatment priorities with their patients. In order to apply such a concept, doctors will need a good understanding of what causes patients to prioritise some of their problems over others. This qualitative study explores what underlying reasons patients have when they appraise their health problems as more or less important.

methodsWe undertook semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 34 patients (aged 70 years and over) in German general practices. Initially, patients received a comprehensive geriatric assessment, on the basis of which they rated the importance of their uncovered health problems. Subsequently, they were interviewed as to why they considered some of their problems important and others not. Transcripts were analysed using qualitative content analysis.

resultsPatients considered their health problems important, if they were severe, constant, uncontrolled, risky or if they restricted daily activities, autonomy and social inclusion. Important problems often correlated with negative feelings. Patients considered problems unimportant, if they were related to a bearable degree of suffering, less restrictions in activities, or psychological adjustment to diseases. Altogether different reasons occurred on the subject of preventive health issues.

conclusionsPatients assess health problems as important if they interfere with what they want from life (life values and goals). Psychological adjustment, by contrast, facilitates a downgrading of the importance. Asking patients with multimorbidity, which health problems are important, may guide physicians to treatment priorities and health problems in need of empowerment.

Indexed as

MultimorbidityQualitative ResearchAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleGeneral PracticeGeriatric AssessmentHumansMalePolypharmacyHealth priority settingMultimorbidityOlder adultsQualitative research

Identifiers

PMID31864309
PMCPMC6925512

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.