Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36374916›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2022

Communication interventions for medically unexplained symptom conditions in general practice: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Ailish Katherine Byrne, Arabella Scantlebury, Katherine Jones, Laura Doherty, David J Torgerson

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Are Difficult Inpatients Also Difficult Primary Care Patients?Journal of general internal medicine · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ailish Katherine ByrneDepartment of Health Sciences, York Trials Unit, University of York, Heslington, York, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5656-5674
Arabella ScantleburyDepartment of Health Sciences, York Trials Unit, University of York, Heslington, York, United Kingdom.
Katherine JonesDepartment of Health Sciences, York Trials Unit, University of York, Heslington, York, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0615-8442
Laura DohertyDepartment of Health Sciences, York Trials Unit, University of York, Heslington, York, United Kingdom.
David J TorgersonDepartment of Health Sciences, York Trials Unit, University of York, Heslington, York, United Kingdom.
University of York · GBUniversity of Warwick · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedically unexplained symptoms (MUS) account for 3-50% of all General Practitioner (GP) consultations and are difficult to diagnose due to their unknown aetiology, symptom overlap between conditions, and lack of effective treatment options. MUS patients' and primary care clinicians frequently face challenges during consultations, with GPs reporting difficulty identifying and classifying MUS, whilst patients report stigma and feeling illegitimised by clinicians. Communication interventions have been proposed as a method to facilitate the doctor-patient relationship and aid the management of MUS.

aimThis systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of primary care based communication interventions at improving MUS patients' and/or clinician outcomes.

methodFour electronic databases were searched from inception to November 2021. Two researchers independently undertook screening, data extraction and quality appraisal. Given the heterogeneous nature of the studies identified, narrative syntheses were conducted, along with meta-analyses where possible to pool data.

results9 papers from 10 Randomised Controlled Trials were included. The included studies displayed considerable risk of bias and poor reporting. Some limited evidence suggests that communication interventions tailored to MUS and not following a pre-specified model (such as reattribution) could improve pain, mental and physical functioning whilst reattribution training may improve clinician confidence treating MUS. However, methodological limitations mean that these findings should be interpreted with caution.

conclusionA range of interventions for improving communication with MUS patients in primary care have been evaluated. However, the heterogeneous nature of existing evidence and poor study quality mean we cannot conclude whether these interventions are effective. Before considering further randomised controlled trials researchers should focus on developing a new or modified communication intervention for MUS patients and their clinicians. TRAIL REGISTRATION: The systematic review was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (registration record CRD42020206437).

Indexed as

General PracticeGeneral PractitionersMedically Unexplained SymptomsCommunicationHumansPhysician-Patient RelationsRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID36374916
PMCPMC9662736
OpenAlexW4308993573

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.