Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38199611›Full record

ArticleFamily medicine and community health2024

Attitudes, beliefs, behaviours and perspectives on barriers and enablers of Australian general practitioners towards non-drug interventions: a national survey.

Loai Albarqouni, Hannah Greenwood, Caroline Dowsett, Tammy Hoffmann, Rae Thomas, Paul Glasziou

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Family medicine and community health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Loai AlbarqouniInstitute for Evidence-based Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences & Medicine, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia lalbarqo@bond.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-4114-9106
Hannah GreenwoodInstitute for Evidence-based Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences & Medicine, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia.
Caroline DowsettInstitute for Evidence-based Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences & Medicine, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7734-9436
Tammy HoffmannInstitute for Evidence-based Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences & Medicine, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia.
Rae ThomasInstitute for Evidence-based Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences & Medicine, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia.
Paul GlasziouInstitute for Evidence-based Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences & Medicine, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia.
Bond University · AU

Funding

Medical Research Council 2008379
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany guidelines recommend non-drug interventions (NDIs) for managing common conditions in primary care. However, compared with drug interventions, NDIs are less widely known, promoted and used. We aim to (1) examine general practitioners' (GPs') knowledge, attitudes and practices for NDIs, including their use of the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) Handbook of Non-Drug Interventions (HANDI), and (2) identify factors influencing their use of NDIs and HANDI.

methodsWe conducted a web-based cross-sectional survey of practicing GP members in Australia during October-November 2022. The survey contained five sections: characteristics of GP; knowledge and use of NDIs; attitudes towards NDIs; barriers and enablers to using HANDI; and suggestions of NDIs and ideas to improve the uptake of NDIs in primary care.

resultsOf the 366 GPs who completed the survey, 242 (66%) were female, and 248 (74%) were ≥45 years old. One in three GPs reported that they regularly ('always') recommend NDIs to their patients when appropriate (34%), whereas one-third of GPs were unaware of HANDI (39%). GPs identified several factors that improve the uptake of HANDI, including 'access and integration of HANDI in clinical practice', 'content and support to use in practice' and 'awareness and training'.

conclusionsWhile many GPs are aware of the effectiveness of NDIs and often endorse their use, obstacles still prevent widespread adoption in primary care. The results of this survey can serve as a foundation for developing implementation strategies to improve the uptake of effective evidence-based NDIs in primary care.

Indexed as

General PractitionersAustraliaBiological TransportCross-Sectional StudiesEvidence-Based MedicineFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedGeneral PracticeHealthy LifestylePrimary Health Care

Identifiers

PMID38199611
PMCPMC10806537
OpenAlexW4390700619

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.