ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2026
'We're all doing different things' - exploring primary care practitioners' perspectives of managing distress: a qualitative study.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2026. 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDistinguishing emotional distress from mental health problems such as anxiety and depression can be difficult for clinicians. Both commonly present and are managed in primary care. There are likely to be important differences in the management of emotional distress compared with anxiety and/or depression, but the current nature of assessment and management is unclear.
aimTo explore how emotional distress is understood and how people are managed by a range of practitioners in primary care settings in the UK. DESIGN AND
settingA qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with primary care practitioners in the UK.
methodOnline interviews were conducted with practitioners who directly assess patients with mental health symptoms, including GPs, nurse practitioners, social prescribers, and mental health practitioners. Recruitment was via a digital poster circulated by research delivery networks. Interviews covered how practitioners understood and identified distress, the support provided to patients, and challenges assessing and managing emotional distress. Verbatim transcriptions were analysed using an inductive thematic approach.
resultsIn total, 29 interviews were conducted and four themes were developed in collaboration with the wider team, including public contributors: the multifaceted nature of distress; 'We're all doing very different things'; managing and understanding distress is challenging; and demedicalising distress in the face of increasing societal pressures. Complexity was driven by the wide-ranging professionals involved, complex patient circumstances, systemic challenges, and societal contexts.
conclusionIdentifying and managing emotional distress is complex, variable, and challenging. Complexity appears to be increasing through the systemic challenges and range of professionals involved.
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.