Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38806216›Full record

ArticleBJGP open2024

How patients experience discussing couple relationship problems with GPs: an interview study.

Siri Dalsmo Berge, Mette Brekke, Eivind Meland, Thomas Mildestvedt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJGP open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Siri Dalsmo BergeDepartment of Global Public Health and Primary Care, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway Siri.Berge@uib.no.
Mette BrekkeDepartment of General Practice, Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Eivind MelandDepartment of Global Public Health and Primary Care, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Thomas MildestvedtDepartment of Global Public Health and Primary Care, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCouple relationship satisfaction is related to good physical health, good mental health, and longevity. Many patients have discussed or wish to discuss their couple relationship with their GP and look for personalised care and support when discussing topics they perceive as sensitive.

aimTo explore patient experiences of discussing couple relationship problems in GP consultations. DESIGN &

settingQualitative study employing semi-structured interviews with patients from general practice in Norway.

methodIndividual interviews with 18 patients who had discussed their couple relationship with their GP. Participants were recruited through both social media and traditional media, and all interviews were digitally recorded. The purposive sample comprised 13 women and five men, representing diverse age groups, backgrounds, and relationship problems. All participants identified as heterosexual. We analysed interview data thematically using systematic text condensation.

resultsThree main themes emerged: 1) GPs in a facilitating role, not on an assembly line; 2) navigating the 'elephant in the room'; and 3) GPs as biomedically competent life witnesses. GP continuity was vital in fostering the trust required to discuss sensitive topics, such as relationship issues. Participants valued a biopsychosocial approach that incorporated knowledge of close relationships into medical consultations. They appreciated both GP support and constructive challenges that prompted them to take responsibility for relationship improvements.

conclusionPatients value their GPs' holistic, supportive, and direct approach in addressing couple relationship problems, although they perceive that GPs do not always have sufficient time. They welcome relevant challenges that can drive positive change.

Indexed as

ConsultationFamily relationshipsGeneral practitionersPrimary healthcareQualitative research

Identifiers

PMID38806216
PMCPMC11687272

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.