The somatising effect of clinical consultation: What patients and doctors say and do not say when patients present medically unexplained physical symptoms
Abstract
Patients with symptoms that doctors cannot explain by physical disease are common in primary care. That they receive disproportionate amounts of physical intervention, which is largely ineffective and sometimes iatrogenic, is usually attributed to patients' belief that they are physically diseased, their denial of psychological difficulties, and their demand for physical intervention. The evidence for this view has mainly been doctors' subjective reports. By observing what patients and doctors say in consultation, we tested hypotheses arising from recent qualitative evidence. In particular, that physical intervention is proposed more often by general practitioners (GPs) than by patients, that most patients indicate psychosocial needs, and that GPs offer little effective explanation or empathy. Consultations of 420 consecutive patients identified by British GPs as presenting medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) were audio-recorded, transcribed and coded, utterance-by-utterance, using a specially developed coding scheme based on the previous qualitative analyses of these kinds of consultation. Physical intervention was, as predicted, proposed more often by GPs than patients. Also as predicted, almost all patients provided cues concerning psychosocial difficulties or their need for explanation. Although, contrary to prediction, most GPs did provide explanations other than physical disease, most also suggested physical disease. Few GPs empathised. The findings suggest that the ex…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Family practitioners may have different conceptions of their task than specialized mental health providers and may therefore behave in a more biomedical way.
“might be explained by the fact that family practitioners may have different conceptions of their task than specialized mental health providers and may therefore behave in a more biomedical way (Ring, Dowrick, Humphris, Davies, & Salmon, 2005).”
From Health beliefs and perceived need for mental health care of anxiety and depression-The patients' perspective explored (2008) · cites this paper as Ring, Dowrick, Humphris, Davies, & Salmon, 2005
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 81 · Cited by 281
- Authors
- Ring, A., Dowrick, C. F., Humphris, G. M., Davies, J., & Salmon, P.
- Affiliations
- University of Liverpool (GB)
- University of St Andrews (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Salmon, Peter
- Venue
- Social Science & Medicine
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2005-10
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1505-1515
- ISSN
- 0277-9536 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2021435841
- Cited by
- 281
- References
- 81
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 49 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 20
- FWCI
- 7.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Social Science & Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Medical Research Council
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Medicine, History, and Philosophy
- Keywords
- medically unexplained symptoms, somatization, doctor-patient interaction, physical interventions, general practitioners, consultation, empathy, explanation, psychosocial needs, iatrogenic injury, primary care
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Family Practice, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Physician-Patient Relations, Referral and Consultation, Somatoform Disorders, State Medicine
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