ArticleBMJ open2021
How is family health history discussed in routine primary healthcare? A qualitative study of archived family doctor consultations.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Health History, Health Condition, Health Behaviours and Health-Seeking Behaviours of Middle-Aged Women Living in a Modern Rural Community: A Survey Research.Nursing open · 2025Observational
- Perceptions of family health history in an East Baltimore community.Journal of community genetics · 2025Article
- Coronary risk factor profiles according to different age categories in premature coronary artery disease patients who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Combining rare and common genetic variants improves population risk stratification for breast cancer.Genetics in medicine open · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesFamily health history underpins genetic medicine. Our study aimed to explore language and patterns of communication relating to family health history observed in interactions between general practitioners (GPs) and their patients within routine primary care consultations.
designSecondary analysis of patient and GP routine consultation data (n=252).
participantsConsultations that included 'family health history' were eligible for inclusion (n=58). PRIMARY OUTCOMES: A qualitative inductive analysis of the interactions from consultation transcripts.
results46/58 conversations about family health history were initiated by the GP. Most discussions around family history lasted for between approximately 1 to 2 min. Patients were invited to share family health history through one of two ways: non-specific enquiry (eg, by asking the patient about 'anything that runs in the family
conclusionsFamily health history is regarded as a genetic test and is embedded in the sociocultural norms of the patient from whom information is being sought. Our findings highlight that it is more complex than asking simply if 'anything' runs in the family. As the collection of family health history is expected to be more routine, it will be important to also consider it from sociocultural perspectives in order to help mitigate any inequities in how family history is collected, and therefore used (or not) in a person's healthcare. Orientating an enquiry away from 'anything' and asking more specific details about particular conditions may help facilitate the dialogue.
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.