ArticleFamily practice2024
Adolescent behavioural risk screening in primary care: physician's point of view.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Social Vulnerability and Racial Disparities in Depression Screening of US Adolescents, 2016 to 2021.American journal of public 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite regular consultation between adolescents/young adults (AYA) and their physicians, they are not regularly screened for psychosocial risk behaviours. This study examines physicians' self-reported psychosocial risk behaviour screening in AYA. It aims to highlight which elements hinder or improve screening abilities. METHODOLOGY: The design was a cross-sectional quantitative survey. Data were obtained through a self-reported questionnaire sent out to primary care physicians (PCP) in Switzerland in 2018. The target population consisted of 1,824 PCP (29% response rate). Participants were asked whether they screened youths from 3 age groups [10-14 y/o, 15-20 y/o, and 21-25y/o] for the HEEADSSS items during child well visits and routine checkups. Barriers to screening included primary consultation motive prioritization, insufficient time, patient compliance, reimbursement, lack of skills related to adolescent health, lack of referral options. Data were analysed first through a bivariate analysis using Chi-square tests then through a multinomial logistic regression.
resultsThe majority of physicians partook in preventive screening for 3-5 psychosocial risk elements. They reported the primary consultation motive as well as a lack of available time as having a high impact on their screening habits. Physician's experience and having discussed confidentiality were related to an increase in the number of topics addressed. Confidentiality remained a significant variable throughout all analyses.
conclusionBarriers such as lack of consultation time and prioritization issues were found by physicians to be critical but did not hinder screening habits. The main element impacting screening habits was assuring confidentiality and the second is self-efficacy.
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.