↓ Skip to main content

Reassurance during low back pain consultations with GPs: a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 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
Reassurance during low back pain consultations with GPs: a qualitative study
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, September 2015
DOI 10.3399/bjgp15x686953
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicola Holt, Tamar Pincus, Steven Vogel

Abstract

Reassurance is commonly recommended in guidelines for the management of low back pain in primary care, although it is poorly defined, and what it means to patients remains unknown. To explore how patients with low back pain perceive practitioners' reassuring behaviours during consultations. Qualitative study undertaken with patients from nine GP surgeries in Northamptonshire, England. Twenty-three patients who had recently consulted for non-specific low back pain were recruited from general practice. Semi-structured interviews explored what they had found reassuring during their consultations and the effect of such reassurance since their consultations. Interview transcripts were analysed using the thematic framework method. Patients each brought to their consultations experiences, beliefs, expectations, and concerns that they wanted the doctor to hear and understand. They were reassured implicitly when it seemed the doctor was taking them seriously and wanted to help; this was also achieved through relationship building and feeling that the GP was readily available to them. However, it was only explicit, informational reassurance that directly addressed patients' concerns by providing them with explanations ruling out serious disease, and helped them to understand and cope with their pain. The themes of implicit and explicit reassurance uncovered here correspond with ideas of affective and cognitive reassurance, respectively. Although the findings support the use of information and education to alleviate concerns, the role of implicit reassurance through relationship building and empathy remains less clear. The impact of these behaviours on outcomes should form a priority for future research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 1%
Unknown 96 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 20%
Researcher 13 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Other 23 24%
Unknown 13 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 22%
Psychology 10 10%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Neuroscience 3 3%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 22 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 04 February 2021.
All research outputs
#3,194,817
of 22,829,083 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#1,411
of 4,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,606
of 274,557 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#24
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,083 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,280 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 274,557 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.