ArticleThe European journal of general practice2020
Communication between Dutch community nurses and general practitioners lacks structure: An explorative mixed methods study .
Article in The European journal of general practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A new way of thinking? Exploring professionals' perspectives on the sustainability of interprofessional team meetings: A focus group study.The European journal of general practice · 2026Article
- "Well, it's very doctor-related" - interprofessional communication and collaboration between GP practices and nurses in the ambulant setting: a qualitative study in southern Germany.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 6: Longitudinal qualitative and mixed-methods approaches for longitudinal and complex health themes in primary care research.The European journal of general practice · 2022Article
- General practitioners' attitude towards cooperation with other health professionals in managing patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy: A cross-sectional study.The European journal of general practice · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCommunity nurses and general practitioners evaluate their patient-related communication to be poor. However, their actual communication has hardly been investigated and specific strategies for improvement are unclear.
objectivesTo explore actual community nurse-general practitioner communication in primary care and gain insights into communication style, and conversation structure and their determinants.
methodsA mixed-methods design was applied. Telephone conversations between community nurses and general practitioners in the Netherlands were recorded and transcribed verbatim. We measured structure and the duration of their conversations, and community nurses' self-confidence towards general practitioners and their trust in and familiarity with the conversation partner. A thematic analysis was applied to the transcripts of the conversations. Correlations between these determinants were calculated using Spearman's correlation coefficient.
resultsThe 18 community nurses recorded 23 conversations with general practitioners. Qualitative analysis revealed that many conversations lacked structure and conciseness, i.e. the nurses started conversations without a clearly articulated question and did not provide adequate background information. The mean duration of their conversations with doctors was 8.8 min. Community nurses with higher self-confidence towards doctors communicated in a more structured way (
conclusionThis exploratory study of actual community nurse-doctor telephone conversations in primary care identified communication structure and nurse self-confidence towards general practitioners as key targets for the improvement of interprofessional communication, which may increase the effectiveness of community nurse-general practitioner collaboration.
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.