ArticleBJGP open2022
Heard, known, and safe in general practice? An interview study with patients with severe and persistent mental illness.
Article in BJGP open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough GPs provide care to many patients with severe and persistent mental illness, the role and skillset of the GP in this space are contested. Patients are less satisfied with GP care of mental health than physical health issues.
aimTo explore patient expectations and experiences of GP roles in their mental health, and identify opportunities for improving mental health care in general practice. DESIGN &
settingPatient participants were recruited from community mental health clinics in Brisbane, Australia.
methodIndividual semi-structured interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of patients. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed professionally. The authors conducted an inductive thematic analysis, attending to participant vulnerability and reflexivity.
resultsSixteen interviews were conducted by one author (RW), with an average duration of 29 minutes. Three overarching themes were identified: being heard, being known, and being safe. Participants greatly valued 'good GPs' who were able to detect early signs of relapse, and with whom they came to feel heard, known, and safe over time. Experiences of perfunctory, hurried care and avoidance of mental health issues were also reported. Many participants were uncertain whether GP training in mental health was sufficient to keep them safe. Patients may suspect GPs who predominantly engage with their physical health to have negative attitudes to mental illness.
conclusionSome GPs play central roles in patients' mental health care. Barriers for others need further exploration, and may include time, confidence, and/or expertise. Findings challenge GPs to engage more actively and effectively with these patients in their general practice consultations.
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.