Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32895240›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2020

The content and conduct of GP consultations for dermatology problems: a cross-sectional study.

Emma Le Roux, Peter J Edwards, Emily Sanderson, Rebecca K Barnes, Matthew J Ridd

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Shared Decision-Making and Body Mass Index in Australian Antenatal Care: An Exploratory OPTION12 Evaluation.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Towards 'Formalising' WhatsApp Teledermatology Practice in KZ-N District Hospitals: Key Informant Interviews.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. How parents and children evaluate emollients for childhood eczema: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022
    Article
  20. Trends in Office Visits for the Five Most Common Skin Diseases in the United States.The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology · 2022
    Review
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Emma Le RouxCentre for Academic Primary Care.
Peter J EdwardsCentre for Academic Primary Care.
Emily SandersonBristol Randomised Trials Collaboration, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol.
Rebecca K BarnesCentre for Academic Primary Care.
Matthew J RiddCentre for Academic Primary Care.
At Bristol · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSkin complaints are common in primary care, and poor outcomes in long-term conditions are often due to low adherence to treatment. Shared decision making and self-management support may help, yet there is little understanding of patient involvement or the support provided by GPs.

aimTo describe the content of primary care consultations for skin problems, including shared decision making practice, delivery of self-management advice, and follow-up. DESIGN AND

settingCross-sectional study of video-recorded UK adult GP consultations and linked data.

methodA coding tool was developed and applied to all consultations with skin problems. Shared decision making was assessed using the observer OPTION

resultsA total of 45/318 consultations (14.2%) related to one or more skin problems, which were discussed alongside other problems in 71.1% (32/45) of consultations. Of the 100 different problems discussed in these consultations, 51 were dermatological. The mean amount of time spent on skin problems in the consultations was 4 minutes 16 seconds. Medication was recommended for 66.7% (34/51) of skin problems, with low shared decision making (mean OPTION

conclusionIn this study, skin problems were usually presented alongside other complaints and resulted in a medication recommendation. Shared decision making was uncommon and self-management advice not consistently given, with re-attendance for the same problem common. GPs' training should reflect how frequently skin problems are seen and seek to improve patient involvement in decision making and support self-management.

Indexed as

DermatologyAdultCross-Sectional StudiesDecision MakingHumansPatient ParticipationReferral and Consultationdecision making, shareddermatologyprimary careself-management

Identifiers

PMID32895240
PMCPMC7480176
OpenAlexW3083993842

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.