Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41730681›Full record

Observational studyThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2026

Safety-netting communication during telephone consultations: an observational study using recorded consultations.

Peter J Edwards, Barbara Caddick, Adam R Skeen, Jordan Lin, Helena Thornton, Matthew J Ridd, Rebecca K Barnes, Chris Salisbury

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study 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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. The relational dimension of safety netting.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Peter J EdwardsCentre for Academic Primary Care, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK peter.edwards@bristol.ac.uk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6999-753X
Barbara CaddickCentre for Academic Primary Care, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3032-0430
Adam R SkeenUniversity of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Jordan LinSomerset NHS Foundation Trust, Somerset, UK.
Helena ThorntonCentre for Academic Primary Care, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Matthew J RiddCentre for Academic Primary Care, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7954-8823
Rebecca K BarnesNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8844-7496
Chris SalisburyCentre for Academic Primary Care, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4378-3960

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2024, one-third of NHS GP consultations in England were conducted by telephone. Although remote consulting can be convenient for patients and GPs, it may increase diagnostic uncertainty. Safety-netting advice (guidance on when, and how, patients should seek further medical help) is a tool used to mitigate clinical risk, but its delivery during telephone consultations has not been studied in detail.

aimTo evaluate the communication, documentation, and patient recall of safety-netting advice in GP telephone consultations. DESIGN &

settingObservational study using data from seven GP practices in south west England.

methodPractices routinely recording telephone consultations were invited to participate. Patients with a recent telephone consultation with a participating clinician were invited to consent to consultation recording retrieval, medical record extraction, and completion of a post-consultation questionnaire. Recordings of 96 telephone consultations were obtained and coded using the validated Safety-Netting Coding Tool. Regression models explored factors associated with safety-netting advice. Patient recall was assessed using post-consultation questionnaires.

resultsThere were 93 instances of safety-netting advice, delivered in 60.4% (

conclusionSafety-netting advice was commonly delivered during GP telephone consultations, but its delivery, documentation, and recall were inconsistent. Opportunities exist to improve the consistency, documentation, and use of written advice to support patient understanding, recall, and safety in remote care.

Indexed as

CommunicationGeneral PracticeReferral and ConsultationRemote ConsultationTelephoneAdultAgedEnglandFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhysician-Patient Relationsgeneral practicepatient safetyprimary health carequality assuranceRemote consultingsafety-netting

Identifiers

PMID41730681
PMCPMC13531582

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.