ArticlePloS one2025
Cross- analyzing the opinions and experiences of nurses, physiotherapists, dentists, midwives, and pharmacists with respect to addictive disorder screening in primary care: A qualitative study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Early addiction disorders screening is recommended in primary care. The goal of health system reform is to include allied health professionals in this screening. The appropriation of their new role has not yet been explored. The main aim of this study was to examine the perspective of allied health professionals in primary care on the screening of addictive disorders. This qualitative study inspired by the grounded theory was carried out between August 2018 and July 2019. Semi-structured individual interviews and focus groups were organized to include of primary care health professionals (physiotherapist, nurse, midwife, pharmacist, and dentist). Thirteen semi-structured individual interviews and four focus groups were recorded and coded. The paramedics described the advantages of their professions for the detection of addictions: home visits, prescription history, habit of intimate subjects, close consultations, etc. Despite daily practice-specific observation posts, they sometimes remained silent witnesses, and their helplessness hindered identification. They felt both closer to the patients and less legitimate than the doctors in dealing with addictions. Finally, their desire for a multidisciplinary approach was limited by the fear of disturbing the doctor and the confusion between betrayal and medical secrecy. Paramedical professionals claimed to have a complementary role to play in identifying addictions. Their reluctance echoed the concept of self-censorship, already described in studies with addictologists and patients. These results must be compared with the opinions of general practitioners and patients.
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.