Evidence map›Paper›PMID 9872892›Full record

ReviewBMJ (Clinical research ed.)1999

Narrative based medicine: why study narrative?

T Greenhalgh, B Hurwitz

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 172 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
172citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–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

172 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. The experience of patients with cancer on narrative practice: A systematic review and meta-synthesis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Experiences of people with long COVID: Symptoms, support strategies and the Long COVID Optimal Health Programme (LC-OHP).Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. A positive autoethnographic study of learning and growth in a beginner tennis player in Korea.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. The Language Games of Pain in Nursing: A Wittgensteinian Analysis of NANDA-I Diagnoses.Nursing philosophy : an international journal for healthcare professionals · 2026
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

112 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

T GreenhalghDepartment of Primary Care and Population Sciences, Royal Free and University College London Medical School, London N19 5NF. p.greenhalgh@ucl.ac.uk
B Hurwitz

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

CommunicationMedicinePhysician-Patient RelationsAnecdotes as TopicEthicsHumansMedical History TakingNarrationSelf ConceptProfessional Patient Relationship

Identifiers

PMID9872892
PMCPMC1114541

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.