ArticleWiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946)2021
What is the significance of guidelines in the primary care setting? : Results of an exploratory online survey of general practitioners in Germany.
Article in Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review of assisted and third-party reproduction guidelines regarding management and care of donors.Reproductive health · 2024Pooled it
- An assessment of variation in quality of hypertension guidelines across income settings using the AGREE II tool.Wellcome open research · 2024Pooled it
- General practitioners' perspectives on diagnosis and treatment of uncomplicated urinary tract infections: A qualitative study in the Northern Dutch-German cross-border region.The European journal of general practice · 2025Article
- Barriers in prescribing antidiabetic medications with cardiovascular benefits: practice, experience, and attitudes of GPs in Croatia.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Best practice for the selection, design and implementation of UK Kidney Association guidelines: a modified Delphi consensus approach.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Primary care involvement in clinical research - prerequisites, motivators, and barriers: results from a study series.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2024Article
- The Reasons for the Low Uptake of New Antidiabetic Drugs with Cardiovascular Effects-A Family Doctor Perspective.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Experiences with Innovation Fund healthcare models in primary care: a qualitative study amongst German general practitioners.Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2024Article
- [The German Innovation Fund and primary care-What expectations and experiences do general practitioners have with regard to participating in innovative care models?]Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Medical guidelines aim to ensure that care processes take place in an evidence-based and structured manner. They are especially relevant in outpatient primary care due to the wide range of symptoms and clinical pictures. In German-speaking countries, there is a lack of current findings documenting general practitioners' opinions and experiences regarding guidelines, their expectations and their views on what improvements could be made to increase the use of this type of evidence-based instrument in the primary care setting. Between April and August 2020, a total of 3098 general practitioners were surveyed in the states of Baden-Württemberg, Hesse and Rhineland-Palatinate via an online questionnaire. Alongside the descriptive evaluation, t‑testing was used to determine significant differences between two independent sampling groups. A factor analysis was also used to cluster the expectations of those surveyed regarding the fulfilment of requirements relating to guidelines. A total of 52% of those surveyed have a positive view of guidelines. Overall, guidelines are associated with an increased evidence-based approach (69%), standardisation of diagnosis and treatment (62%) and a reduction in overprovision or underprovision of care (57%). In all, 62% of the physicians who implemented guidelines observed positive effects on the quality of care provided, and 67% reported that the implementation of guidelines improved the quality of their diagnostic or therapeutic skills. However, implementation is often seen as being complicated (43%) and restricting the physician's ability to act independently (63%). Survey participants suggested that guidelines could be optimised by giving greater consideration to nondrug alternatives (46%), focusing on issues related to quality of life (42%) and offering a comparative assessment of various treatment options (39%). In order to further promote the attractiveness of guidelines for primary care the design of guidelines should be oriented more towards their application; they should be well-presented to make them easier to implement. The scope of action available to the physician should be stressed. The guidelines should provide recommendations on opportunities for the delegation of tasks within practice teams.
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.