↓ 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 Family Practice, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 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 Family Practice, 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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters 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 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 82 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 18%
Student > Master 12 15%
Researcher 9 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 5%
Other 23 28%
Unknown 12 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 26%
Social Sciences 11 13%
Psychology 10 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 9%
Engineering 5 6%
Other 12 15%
Unknown 16 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 22 July 2016.
All research outputs
#3,802,857
of 8,091,619 outputs
Outputs from BMC Family Practice
#625
of 1,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,159
of 269,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Family Practice
#30
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,091,619 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 50th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 269,361 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.