Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 15Mental Health Treatment and AccessPrimary Care and Health OutcomesPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Latvian family physicians' experience diagnosing depression in somatically presenting depression patients: a qualitative study

Open access
Leff, Maija S., Vrubļevska, Jeļena, Lūse, Agita, Rancāns, Elmārs·2017·European Journal of General Practice

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Depression continues to be under-diagnosed in primary care settings. One factor that influences physicians' likelihood of diagnosing depression is patients' presentation style. Patients who initially present with somatic symptoms are diagnosed at a lower rate and with greater delay than patients who present with psychosocial complaints. OBJECTIVES: To identify the barriers preventing depression diagnosis in somatically presenting patients in an Eastern European primary care setting. METHODS: Thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with 16 family physicians (FPs) in Latvia. FPs were sampled using a maximum variation strategy, varying on patient load, urban/rural setting, FP gender, presence/absence of on-site mental health specialists, and FP years of practice. RESULTS: FPs observed that a large subgroup of depression patients presented with solely somatic complaints. FPs often did not recognize depression in somatically presenting patients until several consultations had passed without resolution of the somatic complaint. When FPs had psychosocial information about the somatically presenting patient, they recognized depression more quickly. Use of depression screening questionnaires was rare. Barriers to diagnosis continued beyond recognition. Faced with equivocal symptoms that undermined clinical certainty, FPs postponed investigating their clinical suspicion that the patient had depression and pursued physical examinations that delayed depression diagnosis. FPs also used negative physical examination results to convince reluctant patients of a depression diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Delayed recognition, the need to rule out physical illness, and the use of negative physical examination results to discuss depression with patients all slowed the path to depression diagnosis for somatically presenting patients in Latvian primary care.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13814788.2017.1291626

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 28 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Bernard HR., 2011, Research methods in anthropology: qualitative and quantitative approaches
  2. Trangle M, 2016, Adult depression in primary care
  3. Rancāns E, 2012, Recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of depression and neurotic disorders for family physicians
  4. Tērauds E, 2015, Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of depression

Cited by

See all 15

Metadata

Authors
Leff, M. S., Vrubļevska, J., Lūse, A., & Rancāns, E.
Affiliations
Riga Stradiņš University (LV)
Corresponding author
Leff, Maija S.
Venue
European Journal of General Practice
Published
2017-03-22
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
91-97
ISSN
  • 1381-4788 (ISSN-L)
  • 1751-1402
OpenAlex
W2600656401
Cited by
15
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1
FWCI
4.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • European Journal of General Practice (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Institute of International Education
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Primary Care and Health Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Keywords
depression diagnosis, general practitioners, primary care, underdiagnosis, delayed diagnosis, barriers to diagnosis, physical examination, psychosocial information
MeSH terms
Depression, Female, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Latvia, Male, Mass Screening, Physical Examination, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Physicians, Family, Primary Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Delayed Diagnosis

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.