Cited by 74Patient-Provider Communication in HealthcareLanguage, Discourse, Communication StrategiesMedication Adherence and Compliance

The expression of aversion to medicines in general practice consultations

Britten, Nicky, Stevenson, Fiona, Gafaranga, Joseph, Barry, Christine, Bradley, Colin·2004·Social Science & Medicine

Abstract

Although the relevance of patients' views about medicines for their medicine taking behaviour is now well established, little is known about the ways in which these views are discussed in primary care consultations. In particular, many studies have demonstrated patients' aversion to medicines. This paper examines the form that aversion talk takes in the consultation and how doctors respond to patients' expression of aversion to medicines. It is based on a dataset of 35 case studies of general practice consultations in England. In interviews with researchers, aversion to medicines was expressed in 34 of the 35 cases. In consultations with doctors, aversion was expressed in 10 cases. The interactional dimension of aversion talk in consultations was analysed using Conversation Analysis, and two general patterns were identified. Aversion could be used as an interactional resource, or it could be a topic in its own right. If used as an interactional resource, no real discussion of patients' views of medicines took place. When aversion was a conversational topic in its own right, two situations were observed. Firstly, the doctor elicited patients' views directly. Secondly, patients initiated aversive talk using a range of indirect strategies to do so. Even when patients managed to express their aversion to medicines, doctors did not engage them in any real discussion of their views. A scheme of interpretation is suggested to explain these findings. In this scheme patients perceive medicines to be an extension of the doctor and to be beneficial. In this view it is right for doctors to prescribe medicines and for patients to take medicines. The results of this paper suggest that using aversion as an interactional resource might be the only safe way for patients to express their aversion without seeming to breach the social contract.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.01.019

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 24 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Britten, N., Stevenson, F., Gafaranga, J., Barry, C., & Bradley, C.
Affiliations
  • Peninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry (GB)
  • Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • Brunel University of London (GB)
  • University College Cork (IE)
Corresponding author
Britten, Nicky
Venue
Social Science & Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-10
Volume
59
Issue
7
Pages
1495-1503
ISSN
0277-9536 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2114785584
Cited by
74
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 5
FWCI
14.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Social Science & Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
Keywords
doctor-patient interaction, general practitioner visits, interactional resources, social contract
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Attitude to Health, Drug Therapy, England, Family Practice, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Physician-Patient Relations

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review