ArticleBMC primary care2025
Utilization of clinical practice guidelines and interprofessional collaboration in depression management in Swiss primary care: a cross-sectional survey study among primary care physicians.
Article in BMC primary care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Work preferences and motivations of young general practitioners in Switzerland: findings from a cross-sectional survey of the Swiss Young General Practitioners Association (JHaS).BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Management of depression in primary care in Catalonia: a mixed-method study.BMC psychiatry · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo (i) investigate the current state of depression management in Swiss primary care post-COVID-19, focusing on the utilization of guidelines or associated tools, (ii) explore potential associations with depression management, and (iii) evaluate availability of and communication with psychiatrists and psychotherapists.
methodsA previously developed self-report questionnaire, covering screening, diagnosis, management, and interprofessional collaboration, was distributed online, with a supplementary paper version, to 168 Swiss primary care physicians (PCPs) participating in the Swiss Sentinel Surveillance System. Multivariable logistic regressions explored associations.
resultsOf the 168 primary care physicians invited to participate, 116 completed the survey (response rate: 69%). Among these, 61% utilized guidelines for depression management, with statistically significant associations towards increased guideline utilization for PCPs with some psychiatric training as residents (odds ratio [OR] 4.13; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.27, 16.02) and decreased utilization for the age group 60-81 (OR 0.29; 95% CI 0.09, 0.93). Guideline utilization was associated with perceived competency in prescribing antidepressants (OR 3.51; 95% CI 1.21, 11.08). The majority reported difficulties in organizing therapy with mental health specialists and rarely received feedback after patient referrals.
conclusionWhile the utilization of guidelines among participants was inconsistent, over 60% indicated using either guidelines, tools, or both. The study highlights systemic issues in interprofessional collaboration between PCPs and mental health specialists that require attention.
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.