↓ Skip to main content

‘You feel like your whole world is caving in’: A qualitative study of primary care patients’ conceptualisations of emotional distress

Overview of attention for article published in Health, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#34 of 2,327)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
3 blogs
twitter
29 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
‘You feel like your whole world is caving in’: A qualitative study of primary care patients’ conceptualisations of emotional distress
Published in
Health, October 2016
DOI 10.1177/1363459316674786
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam WA Geraghty, Miriam Santer, Samantha Williams, Jennifer Mc Sharry, Paul Little, Ricardo F Muñoz, Tony Kendrick, Michael Moore

Abstract

General practitioners are tasked with determining the nature of patients' emotional distress and providing appropriate care. For patients whose symptoms appear to fall near the 'boundaries' of psychiatric disorder, this can be difficult with important implications for treatment. There is a lack of qualitative research among patients with symptoms severe enough to warrant consultation, but where general practitioners have refrained from diagnosis. We aimed to explore how patients in this potentially large group conceptualise their symptoms and consequently investigate lay understandings of complex distinctions between emotional distress and psychiatric disorder. Interviews were conducted with 20 primary care patients whom general practitioners had identified as experiencing emotional distress, but had not diagnosed with major depressive disorder. Participants described severe emotional experiences with substantial impact on their lives. The term 'depression' was used in many different ways; however, despite severity, they often considered their emotional experience to be different to their perceived notions of 'actual' depression or mental illness. Where anxiety was mentioned, use appeared to refer to an underlying generalised state. Participants drew on complex, sometimes fluid and often theoretically coherent conceptualisations of their emotional distress, as related to, but distinct from, mental disorder. These conceptualisations differ from those frequently drawn on in research and treatment guidelines, compounding the difficulty for general practitioners. Developing models of psychological symptoms that draw on patient experience and integrate psychological/psychiatric theory may help patients understand the nature of their experience and, critically, provide the basis for a broader range of primary care interventions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 65 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 15%
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Researcher 6 9%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 12 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 11%
Social Sciences 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 17 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 41. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 April 2021.
All research outputs
#1,026,813
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Health
#34
of 2,327 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,763
of 333,687 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health
#1
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,327 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,687 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.