ArticleBJGP open2024
Primary mental health care for adults with mild intellectual disabilities: a focus group study of care professionals' perspectives.
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.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGPs and mental health nurse practitioners (MHNPs) often feel ill equipped to provide mental health (MH) care to people with mild intellectual disabilities (MID). This is worrying, as insufficient primary MH care may lead to more severe or chronic problems. To improve primary MH care for this patient group, account must be taken of the experiences and needs of GPs and MHNPs providing the care.
aimTo explore GPs' and MHNPs' experiences, needs, and recommendations for improvement regarding primary MH care for adults with MID. DESIGN &
settingA qualitative study was undertaken using focus groups with GPs and MHNPs in the Netherlands.
methodThe focus groups were guided by topics based on an interview study with adults with MID receiving primary MH care. Transcripts were analysed by thematic analysis.
resultsFour focus groups, with 19 GPs and nine MHNPs, revealed four themes describing the needs and perceived complexity involved in providing MH care to patients with both MID and MH problems: (1) GPs' and MHNPs' struggles with adapting to challenging patient characteristics; (2) importance and difficulties of establishing a good doctor-patient relationship; (3) facilitating and hampering roles of the patient's network; and (4) GPs' and MHNPs' challenges to provide care in the healthcare chain.
conclusionGPs and MHNPs often experience providing care and support to this patient group as burdensome. It is important to consider the MID throughout the MH trajectory, to invest in a strong doctor-patient relationship, and to establish a stable, sustainable network and coordinated collaborative care around the patient.
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.