↓ Skip to main content

How do general practitioners contribute to preventing long-term work disability of their patients suffering from depressive disorders? A qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Primary Care, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
113 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
How do general practitioners contribute to preventing long-term work disability of their patients suffering from depressive disorders? A qualitative study
Published in
BMC Primary Care, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12875-016-0459-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chantal Sylvain, Marie-José Durand, Pascale Maillette, Lise Lamothe

Abstract

Depression is a major cause of work absenteeism that general practitioners (GPs) face directly since they are responsible for sickness certification and for supervising the return to work (RTW). These activities give GPs a key role in preventing long-term work disability, yet their practices in this regard remain poorly documented. The objectives of this study were therefore to describe GPs' practices with people experiencing work disability due to depressive disorders and explore how GPs' work context may impact on their practices. We conducted semi-structured individual interviews with 13 GPs and six mental healthcare professionals in two sub-regions of Quebec. The sub-regions differed in terms of availability of specialized resources offering public mental health services. Data were anonymized and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was performed to identify patterns in the GPs' practices and highlight impacting factors in their work context. Our results identified a set of practices common to all the GPs and other practices that differentiated them. Two profiles were defined on the basis of the various practices documented. The first is characterized by the integration of the RTW goal into the treatment goal right from sickness certification and by interventions that include the workplace, albeit indirectly. The second is characterized by a lack of early RTW-oriented action and by interventions that include little workplace involvement. Regardless of the practice profile, actions intended to improve collaboration with key stakeholders remain the exception. However, two characteristics of the work context appear to have an impact: the availability of a dedicated mental health nurse and the regular provision of clinical information by psychotherapists. These conditions are rarely present but tend to make a significant difference for the GPs. Our results highlight the significant role of GPs in the prevention of long-term work disability and their need for support through the organization of mental health services at the primary care level.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 113 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 15%
Student > Master 15 13%
Researcher 14 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 9%
Student > Postgraduate 6 5%
Other 24 21%
Unknown 27 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 23%
Psychology 14 12%
Social Sciences 12 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 11%
Engineering 5 4%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 30 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 21 April 2022.
All research outputs
#7,047,954
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#914
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,919
of 355,754 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#20
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 355,754 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.