ArticleScandinavian journal of primary health care2021
Defensive medicine in Danish general practice. Types of defensive actions and reasons for practicing defensively.
Article in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Endovascular therapy vs. conventional medical treatment for symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Neuroradiology · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- The Mediating Role of Working Hours in the Effect of Surgical and Internal Medicine Residents' Fear of Malpractice on Defensive Medical Practices.The Eurasian journal of medicine · 2026Article
- Exploring the impact of workplace violence on defensive medicine and patient outcomes: an empirical analysis using regression discontinuity.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- The influence of fears of perceived legal consequences on general practitioners' practice in relation to defensive medicine - a cross-sectional survey in Germany.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- The 40Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2023Article
- Collateral Victims of Defensive Medical Practice.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Blood tests - too much of a good thing.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the occurrence of and types of defensive medicine (DM), and the reasons for practicing DM in general practice.
designProspective survey registration of consecutive consultations regarding defensive medicine defined as: Actions that are not professionally well founded but are carried out due to demands and pressure. The GPs registered the degree of defensiveness, the type(s) of defensive action(s) and the reason(s) for acting defensively.
settingDanish general practice. SUBJECTS: A total of 26 GPs registered a total of 1,758 consultations.
main outcome measuresDefensive medical actions.
resultsDefensive actions were performed in 12% (210/1749) of all consultations. A fifth (46/210) of the defensive actions were characterised by the GPs as 'moderately' or 'highly' defensive. Frequent types of defensive actions were: blood tests, point-of-care-tests (POCTs) and referrals. Common reasons for defensive actions were: Influence from patients, 37% (78/210), concerns of overlooking severe disease, 32% (67/210) and influence from patient relatives, 12% (25/210).
conclusionDanish GPs registered self-perceived defensive actions in a prospective survey. DM was carried out in one out of eight consultations, most often due to patient influence. The most frequent defensive actions were blood tests, POCTs and referrals.
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.