Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32900366›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2020

'Motivational work': a qualitative study of preventive health dialogues in general practice.

Marie Broholm-Jørgensen, Siff Monrad Langkilde, Tine Tjørnhøj-Thomsen, Pia Vivian Pedersen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Marie Broholm-JørgensenNational Institute of Public Health, Research Program on Health and Social Conditions, University of Southern Denmark, Studiestræde 6, 1455, Copenhagen K, Denmark. mbro@niph.dk.ORCID 0000-0001-9005-0754
Siff Monrad LangkildeThe Danish Centre for Urban Regeneration and Community Development, Hvidovre, Denmark.
Tine Tjørnhøj-ThomsenNational Institute of Public Health, Research Program on Health and Social Conditions, University of Southern Denmark, Studiestræde 6, 1455, Copenhagen K, Denmark.
Pia Vivian PedersenNational Institute of Public Health, Research Program on Health and Social Conditions, University of Southern Denmark, Studiestræde 6, 1455, Copenhagen K, Denmark.
University of Southern Denmark · DK

Funding

Comm. of Qual. & Educ. in Gen. Pract., Reg.of South.Denm 14/43732Comm. of Qual. & Educ. in Gen. Pract., Reg.of South.Denm.] 15/10562Region of Southern Denmark 11/13244
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of this article is to explore preventive health dialogues in general practice in the context of a pilot study of a Danish primary preventive intervention 'TOF' (a Danish acronym for 'Early Detection and Prevention') carried out in 2016. The intervention consisted of 1) a stratification of patients into one of four groups, 2) a digital support system for both general practitioners and patients, 3) an individual digital health profile for each patient, and 4) targeted preventive services in either general practice or a municipal health center.

methodsThe empirical material in this study was obtained through 10 observations of preventive health dialogues conducted in general practices and 18 semi-structured interviews with patients and general practitioners. We used the concept of 'motivational work' as an analytical lens for understanding preventive health dialogues in general practice from the perspectives of both general practitioners and patients.

resultsWhile the health dialogues in TOF sought to reveal patients' motivations, understandings, and priorities related to health behavior, we find that the dialogues were treatment-oriented and structured around biomedical facts, numeric standards, and risk factor guidance. Overall, we find that numeric standards and quantification of motivation lessens the dialogue and interaction between General Practitioner and patient and that contextual factors relating to the intervention framework, such as a digital support system, the general practitioners' perceptions of their professional position as well as the patients' understanding of prevention -in an interplay-diminished the motivational work carried out in the health dialogues.

conclusionThe findings show that the influence of different kinds of context adds to the complexity of prevention in the clinical encounter which help to explain why motivational work is difficult in general practice.

Indexed as

General PracticeGeneral PractitionersHumansMotivationPilot ProjectsPreventive Health ServicesDenmarkGeneral practiceMotivation, qualitative researchPreventionPreventive health dialogues

Identifiers

PMID32900366
PMCPMC7487907
OpenAlexW3084345003

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.