ArticleFamily practice2024
General practitioners' views on cardiovascular prevention for ethnic minorities-a qualitative study in the Netherlands.
Article in Family practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diversity and Representation in Cardiovascular Research: Evidence Gaps, Emerging Models, and Policy Implications.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Review
- A Coach-Supported mHealth Lifestyle Intervention to Reduce Dementia Risk in Persons With Low Socioeconomic Status or a Migration Background: Qualitative Co-Design Study.Journal of participatory medicine · 2025Article
- General practitioners' perspectives, preferences, and practices in prescribing antihypertensive medication in primary, uncomplicated hypertension.Family practice · 2025Article
- Article
- First-generation Turkish immigrants' views and preferences on cardiovascular disease prevention in primary care - a qualitative study in the Netherlands.Journal of migration and health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesWhile ethnic minorities in Europe are disproportionally affected by cardiovascular disease (CVD), little is known about how general practitioners (GPs) perceive differences in risk or care needs across ethnic minority groups. Therefore, we explored GPs' views on whether ethnicity influences cardiovascular risk, whether a culturally sensitive approach is warranted, on potential barriers in the provision of such care, and to find potential opportunities to improve cardiovascular prevention for these groups.
methodsWe conducted a qualitative study by interviewing GPs practising in The Netherlands. The interviews were semistructured, audio-recorded, and analysed by 2 researchers using thematic analysis.
resultsWe interviewed 24 Dutch GPs (50% male). GPs' views on the impact of ethnicity on CVD risk varied widely, yet it was generally recognized as a relevant factor in cardiovascular prevention for most minority groups, prompting earlier case-finding of high-risk patients. While GPs were aware of sociocultural differences, they emphasized an individualized approach. Perceived limitations were language barriers and unfamiliarity with sociocultural customs, leading to a need for continuing medical education on culturally sensitive care and reimbursement of telephone interpreting services.
conclusionDutch GPs have differing views on the role of ethnicity in evaluating and treating cardiovascular risk. Despite these differences, they emphasized the importance of a personalized and culturally sensitive approach during patient consultations and expressed a need for continuing medical education. Additional research on how ethnicity influences CVD risk may strengthen cardiovascular prevention in increasingly diverse primary care populations.
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.