Observational studyPrimary health care research & development2025
Improving frequency and content of referral correspondence between general practitioners and psychiatrists: a cross-sectional descriptive study.
Observational study in Primary health care research & development, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWritten referrals and follow-up correspondence between referring general practitioners (GPs) and psychiatrists is a medico-legal responsibility and integral part of caring for patients with mental illness. Objective: To describe expectations and practices that GPs and psychiatrists have when exchanging correspondence concerning patients with mental health problems.
methodsIn this observational, declarative, and cross-sectional study, two surveys were used to evaluate the expectations, frequency, and content of correspondence exchanged between GPs and psychiatrists. The questionnaire was based on the National College for the Quality of Psychiatric Care 2010 recommendations. Conducted in a regional setting in France between 2014 and 2016, the study involved 2754 GPs and 575 psychiatrists.
resultsOverall, we achieved a positive response rate of 33% (189/575) of psychiatrists and 23% (628/2754) of GPs, which was similar in each local region. Regarding the correspondence from GPs to psychiatrists, 478 (75%) GPs declared having written a referral for an initial consultation and 84 (44%) psychiatrists declared having received a referral. Regarding the correspondence from psychiatrists to GPs, 144 (76%) psychiatrists declared having written at least one letter after the initial consultation or during follow-up and 160 (25%) GPs declared having received return correspondence. The GPs would like to be better informed about psychotherapeutic or long-term management, leave of absence from work, surveillance measures, prognosis, and division of specialist roles. The psychiatrists would like to receive more information about previous medication trialed, the level of willingness the patient has to consult a psychiatrist and any allergies or intolerances to medication.
conclusionThis study highlights the need to improve the disparity between expected and received correspondence from GPs and psychiatrists concerning patients with mental health problems.
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.