ArticleBMJ open2021
Understanding physician behaviour in the 6-8 weeks hip check in primary care: a qualitative study using the COM-B.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Identifying barriers and opportunities to facilitate the uptake of whole genome sequencing in paediatric haematology and oncology practice.BMC medical education · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesA compulsory hip check is performed on an infant at 6-8 weeks in primary care for the detection of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). Missed diagnoses and infants incorrectly labelled with DDH remain an important problem. The nature of physician behaviour as a likely source of this problem has not been explored. The aims of this study were to make a behavioural diagnosis of general practitioners (GPs) who perform these hip checks, and identify potential behavioural change techniques that could make the hip checks more effective.
designQualitative study with in-depth semistructured interviews of 6-8 weeks checks. We used the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation and Behaviour model in making a behavioural diagnosis and elicited factors that can be linked to improving the assessment.
settingPrimary care.
participants17 GPs (15 female) who had between 5 and 34 years of work experience were interviewed.
resultsCapability related to knowledge of evidence-based criteria and skill to identify DDH were important behavioural factors. Both physical (clinic time and space) and social (practice norms), opportunity were essential for optimal behaviour. Furthermore, motivation related to the importance of the 6-8 weeks check and confidence to perform the check and refer appropriately were identified in the behavioural diagnosis.
conclusionAspects of capability, opportunity and motivation affect GPs' diagnosis and referral behaviours in relation to DDH. The findings from this work extend current knowledge and will inform the development of an intervention aimed at improving the diagnosis of DDH.
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.