Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 216

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cell biology of liver endothelial and Kupffer cells.

Open access
Smedsrød, B, De Bleser, P J, Braet, F, Lovisetti, P, Vanderkerken, K, Wisse, E, Geerts, A·1994·Gut

Abstract

Abstract Objective: To explore the impact of participating in undergraduate teaching in general practice for patients with common mental disorders. Design: Questionnaire survey and qualitative in-depth interviews. Setting: Community based undergraduate teaching programme for fourth year students at a London medical school doing a psychiatry attachment. Participants: Questionnaire survey: all patients involved in the teaching programme over one academic year. In-depth interviews: 20 patients, 14 students, and 12 general practitioner tutors participating in the programme. Results: The questionnaire showed high levels of satisfaction with teaching encounters for participating patients, which were corroborated in the interviews. Many patients and general practitioners reported specific therapeutic benefits for patients from contact with students, including raised self esteem and empowerment; the development of a coherent “illness narrative”; new insights into their problems; and a deeper, more balanced, and understanding doctor-patient relationship. For a few patients the teaching caused some distress, which may relate to a lack of insight into their condition or deficits in students9 interviewing skills. Conclusions: Participation in teaching can have additional positive therapeutic outcomes for selected patients with common mental disorders, although a small minority report negative effects. Testing in a larger sample is needed to determine the characteristics of patients in these two subgroups and establish whether these effects persist. What is already known on this topic Patients show high levels of general satisfaction with their participation in teaching Little is known in detail about outcomes for patients who participate in teaching—in particular, patients with common mental disorders in community settings What this study adds Patients with common mental disorders respond well to participation in undergraduate teaching in primary care Most patients value time to talk and reflect, and some gained a stronger, more balanced doctor-patient relationship In some patients the process results in higher self esteem and empowerment, a more coherent “illness narrative,” and new insights A few patients find the teaching encounter distressing

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 · 10.1136/gut.35.11.1509

Cites

1 of 1 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

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 1 references

Cited by

See all 216

Metadata

Authors
Smedsrød, B., De Bleser, P. J., Braet, F., Lovisetti, P., Vanderkerken, K., Wisse, E., & Geerts, A.
Venue
Gut
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1994-11
Volume
35
Issue
11
Pages
1509-1516
ISSN
  • 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3288
OpenAlex
W2047354583
Cited by
216
References
1
FWCI
2.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Cell biology of liver endothelial and Kupffer cells. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/gut.35.11.1509
The paper
Smedsrød, B., De Bleser, P. J., Braet, F., Lovisetti, P., Vanderkerken, K., Wisse, E., & Geerts, A. (1994). Cell biology of liver endothelial and Kupffer cells. Gut. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.35.11.1509

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.