Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35854666›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2022

Blood tests in primary care: A qualitative study of communication and decision-making between doctors and patients.

Jessica Watson, Penny F Whiting, Chris Salisbury, William T Hamilton, Jonathan Banks

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Communicating blood test results in primary care: a mixed-methods systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Identifying people at risk of rheumatoid arthritis in primary care: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. GPs' perspectives on diagnostic testing in children with persistent non-specific symptoms: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Effects of fermentedOpen veterinary journal · 2024
    Article
  13. GPs' perspectives on diagnostic tests for children: a qualitative interview study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Exploration of reasons for primary care testing (the Why Test study): a UK-wide audit using the Primary care Academic CollaboraTive.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Article
  16. Understanding the patient's experience of coeliac disease diagnosis: a qualitative interview study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Article
  17. Blood tests in primary care: A qualitative study of communication and decision-making between doctors and patients.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jessica WatsonCentre for Academic Primary Care, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8177-6438
Penny F WhitingCentre for Academic Primary Care, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Chris SalisburyCentre for Academic Primary Care, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
William T HamiltonUniversity of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK.
Jonathan BanksCentre for Academic Primary Care, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveBlood tests are commonly used in primary care as a tool to aid diagnosis, and to offer reassurance and validation for patients. If doctors and patients do not have a shared understanding of the reasons for testing and the meaning of results, these aims may not be fulfilled. Shared decision-making is widely advocated; yet, most research focusses on treatment decisions rather than diagnostic decisions. The aim of this study was to explore communication and decision-making around diagnostic blood tests in primary care.

methodsQualitative interviews were undertaken with patients and clinicians in UK primary care. Patients were interviewed at the time of blood testing, with a follow-up interview after they received test results. Interviews with clinicians who requested the tests provided paired data to compare clinicians' and patients' expectations, experiences and understandings of tests. Interviews were analysed thematically using inductive and deductive coding.

resultsA total of 80 interviews with 28 patients and 19 doctors were completed. We identified a mismatch in expectations and understanding of tests, which led to downstream consequences including frustration, anxiety and uncertainty for patients. There was no evidence of shared decision-making in consultations preceding the decision to test. Doctors adopted a paternalistic approach, believing that they were protecting patients from anxiety.

conclusionPatients were not able to develop informed preferences and did not perceive that choice is possible in decisions about testing, because they did not have sufficient information and a shared understanding of tests. A lack of shared understanding at the point of decision-making led to downstream consequences when test results did not fulfil patients' expectations. Although shared decision-making is recommended as best practice, it does not reflect the reality of doctors' and patients' accounts of testing; a broader model of shared understanding seems to be more relevant to the complexity of primary care diagnosis. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: A patient and public involvement group comprising five participants with lived experience of blood testing in primary care met regularly during the study. They contributed to the development of the research objectives, planning recruitment methods, reviewing patient information leaflets and topic guides and also contributed to discussion of emerging themes at an early stage in the analysis process.

Indexed as

CommunicationDecision MakingHematologic TestsHumansPatient ParticipationPrimary Health CareQualitative Researchblood testsdoctor-patient relationshippaternalismpatient engagementprimary health carequalitative researchshared decision-making

Identifiers

PMID35854666
PMCPMC9615068

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.