Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37587771›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2023

Patients' requests for radiological imaging: A qualitative study on general practitioners' perspectives.

Lizzie De Silva, Melissa Baysari, Melanie Keep, Peter Kench, Jillian Clarke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Patients' requests for radiological imaging: A qualitative study on general practitioners' perspectives.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Article
  9. 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.

Lizzie De SilvaDiscipline of Medical Imaging Science, Sydney School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7952-2095
Melissa BaysariBiomedical Informatics and Digital Health, Charles Perkins Centre D17, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1645-9126
Melanie KeepSydney School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9516-0303
Peter KenchDiscipline of Medical Imaging Science, Sydney School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4327-0321
Jillian ClarkeDiscipline of Medical Imaging Science, Sydney School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3241-1229

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWith the increasing availability of information, patients are becoming more informed about radiology procedures and requesting imaging studies. This qualitative study aims to explore factors that influence general practitioners' (GPs) decisions to fulfil patient requests for imaging studies during clinical consultation.

methodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 GPs working across five private medical centres in Northwest Sydney. Conventional content analysis was used with emergent themes to identify GPs perspectives.

resultsSix themes stood out from the interviews with GPs fulfilling patient requests for imaging studies. They included four pertaining to patient factors: patient expectations, 'therapeutic scans', 'impressive labels' and entitled. Two further themes pertained to the GP perspective and included defensive medicine, and 'new patients'. Requests are fulfilled from anxious or health-obsessed patients, with GPs worrying about litigation if they refuse. However, GPs decline requests from patients with entitlement attitudes or during first visits. DISCUSSION: The findings suggest that GPs struggle to balance their responsibilities as gatekeepers of imaging with patients' expectations of request fulfilment. Clear guidelines on the appropriate use of diagnostic imaging and its limitations could help patients understand its proper use and ease anxiety. Additionally, education and training for GPs could help them manage patient expectations and provide appropriate care. PATIENT CONTRIBUTIONS: Patients, service users, caregivers, people with lived experiences or members of the public were not directly involved in the design, conduct, analysis or interpretation of the study. However, our study was conducted in primary care facilities where the GPs were interviewed about patients' requests for diagnostic imaging based on their own initiatives. GPs' perspectives in managing patient expectations and healthcare utilisation were explored within the Australian Medicare system, where medical imaging and image-guided procedures come at little to no cost to the individual. The study findings contribute to a better understanding of the challenges faced by GPs in dealing with patient consumerism and requests for diagnostic imaging, as well as factors influencing request fulfilment or denial. Insights gained from this study may inform future research about delivering patient-centred care within a similar context.

Indexed as

General PractitionersRadiologyAgedAttitude of Health PersonnelAustraliaHumansNational Health ProgramsQualitative Researchconsumerismdoctor-patient relationshipgeneral practitionerimaginginternetpatient-requested radiology

Identifiers

PMID37587771
PMCPMC10632629

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.