ArticleBMC primary care2025
Perceptions of the usefulness of Choosing Wisely among general practitioners in Norway: a nationwide survey.
Article in BMC primary care, 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
backgroundChoosing Wisely is an international initiative to curb medical overuse. The Norwegian College of General Practice has published recommendations to avoid commonly used services for safer healthcare. This study investigated Norwegian GPs' perceptions of Choosing Wisely.
methodsCross-sectional online survey of Norwegian GPs in 2021. We report GPs' perceptions of Choosing Wisely recommendations as proportions, using multiple ordinal regression to assess factors influencing the campaign's perceived usefulness.
resultsResponses from 900 GPs, with a response rate of 18% were included. 81% were aware of Choosing Wisely, and of these 82% found the campaign somewhat or very useful in reducing overdiagnosis or overtreatment. This correlated with lower levels of work-related stress (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45-0.83) and more frequently reaching an agreement with patients to avoid unnecessary medical activities (AOR 1.93, 95% CI 1.26-2.95). More frequently reaching agreement with patients was also associated with finding the campaign very useful (AOR 2.21, 95% CI 1.51-3.24). Among those who did not find the campaign useful, 74% stated that this could partly be due to the campaign's inability to influence patients' opinions. 90% of the GPs who were aware of the campaign had implemented one or more recommendations.
conclusionsChoosing Wisely appears to be considered useful by a substantial proportion of Norwegian GPs. Since the effectiveness of the campaign seems to be linked to the ability to manage gatekeeping, it may be beneficial to bolster the gatekeeping role of GPs and raise public awareness of medical overuse.
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.