↓ Skip to main content

Factors contributing to the recognition of anxiety and depression in general practice

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Family Practice, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 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
Factors contributing to the recognition of anxiety and depression in general practice
Published in
BMC Family Practice, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12875-018-0784-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Henny Sinnema, Berend Terluin, Daniëlle Volker, Michel Wensing, Anton van Balkom

Abstract

Adequate recognition of anxiety and depression by general practitioners (GPs) can be improved. Research on factors that are associated with recognition is limited and shows mixed results. The aim of this study was to explore which patient and GP characteristics are associated with recognition of anxiety and depression. We performed a secondary analysis on data from 444 patients who were recruited for a randomized trial. Recognition of anxiety and depression was defined in terms of information in the medical records, in patients who screened positive on the extended Kessler 10 (EK-10). A total of 10 patient and GP characteristics, measured at baseline, were tested and included in a multilevel regression model to examine their impact on recognition. Patients who reported a perceived need for psychological care (OR = 2.54, 95% CI 1.60-4.03) and those with higher 4DSQ distress scores (OR = 1.03; 95% CI 1.00-1.07) were more likely to be recognized. In addition, patients' anxiety or depression was less likely to be recognized when GPs were less confident in their abilities to identify depression (OR = 0.97; 95% CI 0.95-0.99). Patients' age, chronic medical condition, somatisation, severity of anxiety and depression, and functional status were not associated with the recognition of anxiety and depression. There is room for improvement of the recognition of anxiety and depression. Quality improvement activities that focus on increasing GPs' confidence in the ability to identify symptoms of distress, anxiety and depression, as part of care according to guidelines, may improve recognition.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 27%
Researcher 8 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 13 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 33%
Psychology 6 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Unspecified 2 4%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 13 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 27 June 2018.
All research outputs
#12,023,905
of 13,560,538 outputs
Outputs from BMC Family Practice
#1,271
of 1,357 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,192
of 267,526 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Family Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,560,538 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,357 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 267,526 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them