ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2026
'It's not just thrush, it's recurrent thrush': a qualitative study of patient and clinician perspectives on diagnosing recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis.
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. 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.
- Accumulative experiences of recurrent vulvovaginal thrush: a qualitative study of primary care navigation from patient and clinician perspectives.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026Article
- Recurrent urinary tract infections in primary care: a qualitative study of women's experiences.BMC primary care · 2026Article
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
backgroundExisting qualitative research reports patient dissatisfaction with diagnostic processes for recurrent vulvovaginal thrush in primary care. This dissatisfaction centres on perceived diagnostic delays and a lack of clinical awareness of guidelines.
aimTo understand how patients and healthcare professionals experience and perceive the diagnostic process for recurrent thrush in UK primary care and what can be learned to improve diagnostic pathways, clinical encounters, and patient experiences. DESIGN AND
settingA qualitative study of patient experiences with recurrent vulvovaginal thrush and healthcare professional perspectives about providing care was undertaken.
methodQualitative interviews were conducted with 32 people who self-identified as having recurrent thrush and 25 healthcare professionals working in primary care and sexual health services in England. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis to develop themes across and within the datasets. The Candidacy Framework was then applied to interpret findings in relation to access to diagnosis and care. Patient and public involvement informed topic guide development and interpretation of results.
resultsDiffering expectations, perceptions, or understanding of recurrent thrush led patients to perceive missed opportunities in diagnostic pathways. The diagnostic process by which patients and primary care professionals identified recurrent thrush is presented through the candidacy framework stages of: identifying candidacy; navigating services and permeability; (re)appearing at services; adjudication; and offers and resistance.
conclusionDiagnosis was recognised as a complex process that involved identifying patterns of recurrence, documenting this recurrence, accessing testing, interpreting test results, and forming a diagnosis as a label that opened up management pathways. Implications for practice are presented.
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.