Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36576906›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

General practitioners' everyday clinical decision-making on psychosocial problems of children and youth in the Netherlands.

Lennard T van Venrooij, Pieter C Barnhoorn, Anne Marie Barnhoorn-Bos, Robert R J M Vermeiren, Matty R Crone

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Lennard T van VenrooijDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, LUMC Curium, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7413-5229
Pieter C BarnhoornDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), Leiden, The Netherlands.
Anne Marie Barnhoorn-BosGGZ Rivierduinen, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Robert R J M VermeirenDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, LUMC Curium, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Matty R CroneDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), Leiden, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPsychosocial problems in children and youth are common and may negatively impact their lives and the lives of their families. Since general practitioners (GPs) play a crucial role in detecting and intervening in such problems, it is clinically necessary to improve our insight into their clinical decision-making (CDM). The objective of this study was to explore which mechanisms underlie GPs' everyday CDM and their options for management or referral. MATERIAL AND

methodsThis was a mixed methods study in which qualitative (interview substudy) and quantitative (online survey substudy) data were collected from GPs. Using a question framework and vignettes representative of clinical practice, GPs' CDM was explored. GPs were selected by means of an academic research network and purposive sampling. Data collection continued in constant comparison between both substudies. Using grounded theory, data from both substudies were triangulated into a flowchart consisting of mechanisms and management/referral options.

resultsCDM-mechanisms were divided into three groups. GP-related mechanisms were GPs' primary approach of the problem (somatically or psychosocially) and their self-assessed competence to solve the problem based on interest in and knowledge about youth mental health care. Mechanisms related to the child and its social context included GPs' assessment whether there was psychiatric (co)morbidity, their sense of self-limitedness of the problem and assessed complexity of the problem. Whether GPs' had existing collaboration agreements with youth care providers and how they experienced their collaboration were collaboration-related mechanisms.

conclusionThe current study contributes to a relatively unexplored research area by revealing GP's in-depth thought processes regarding their CDM. However, existing research in this area supports the identified CDM mechanisms. Future initiatives should focus on validating CDM mechanisms in a larger population. If confirmed, mechanisms could be integrated into GP training and may offer guidelines for regulating proper access to mental health care services.

Indexed as

General PractitionersMental Health ServicesAdolescentAttitude of Health PersonnelChildClinical Decision-MakingHumansNetherlandsQualitative ResearchSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID36576906
PMCPMC9797081

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.