Gut Feelings Questionnaire in daily practice: a feasibility study using a mixed-methods approach in three European countries

ObjectivesTo examine whether the quality of the patient–physician relationship, assessed by the general practitioner (GP) and the patient, associates with GPs’ use of gut feeling (GF) in cancer diagnosis.DesignCross-sectional questionnaire survey of cancer patients and their GPs.SettingDanish primary care.ParticipantsNewly diagnosed cancer patients and their GPs. Patients completed a questionnaire and provided the name of the GP to whom they have presented their symptoms. The named GP subsequently received a questionnaire.Primary and secondary outcome measuresGPs’ use of GF in the diagnostic process for the particular patient. GPs who answered that they used their GF ‘to a high degree’ or ‘to a very high degree’ were categorised as ‘used their GF to a great extent’. GPs who answered that they used their GF ‘to some degree’, ‘to a limited degree’ or ‘not at all’ were categorised as ‘limited or no use of GF’.ResultsGPs were less likely to use GF when they assessed relational aspects of the patient encounter as difficult compared with less difficult (OR=0.67; 95% CI 0.46 to 0.97). The physician-reported level of empathy was positively associated with use of GF (OR=2.60; 95% CI 1.60 to 4.22). The lower use of GF in difficult encounters was not modified by level of empathy.ConclusionsExperiencing relational aspects of patient encounter as difficult acted as a barrier for the use of GF in cancer diagnosis. Although physician-rated empathy increased use of GF, high empathy did not dissolve the low use of GF in difficult encounters. As diagnosis of cancer is a key challenge in primary care, it is important that GPs are aware that the sensitivity of cancer-related GF is compromised by a difficult patient–physician relationship.

show abstract

“…The item was pilot-tested, but not further validated. After our data were collected, a promising 11-item GF questionnaire was published 34…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient–physician relationship and use of gut feeling in cancer diagnosis in primary care: a cross-sectional survey of patients and their general practitioners

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the application of the structural feature could be planned from the perspective of the studies by Barais et al. on the feasibility of the GFQ in daily life [ 6 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Turkish GPs can now participate in cross-border multicentre studies, such as repeating the studies done by Barais [ 6 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A sense of reassurance means that GPs feel safe regarding the management and course of the disease, even if they are unsure of the diagnosis [ 5 ]. Based on these definitions, a Dutch Gut Feelings Questionnaire (GFQ) was created and validated to determine the presence or absence of ‘gut feelings’ in GPs’ clinical reasoning at the end of consultation [ 6 ]. After a linguistic validation procedure, the Dutch questionnaire was translated into English [ 2 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The linguistic validation of the gut feelings questionnaire in Turkish

Elbi,

Tan,

Yokus

et al. 2023

European Journal of General Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background ‘Gut feelings’ are frequently used by general practitioners in the clinical decision-making process, especially in situations of uncertainty. The Gut Feelings Questionnaire (GFQ) has been developed in the Netherlands and is now available in English, French, German, Polish, Spanish, and Catalan, enabling cross-border studies on the subject. However, a Turkish version of the GFQ is lacking. Objectives A Turkish version of the GFQ. Methods A linguistic validation procedure was conducted, which took place in six phases: forward translation (step 1), backward translation (step 2), first consensus (step 3), cultural validation (step 4), second consensus (step 5), and final version (step 6). Results The absence of literal equivalent of the term ‘gut feelings’ in Turkish was determined. The word ‘intuition’ was chosen as the Turkish literal equivalent of ‘gut feelings’. There were also some challenges in finding the exact meanings of words and expressions in Turkish literature. However, we succeeded in finding adequate and responsible solutions. A Turkish version of the GFQ is available now. Conclusion With these validated GFQs, Turkish GPs can facilitate studies of the role of ‘gut feelings’ in clinical reasoning.

show abstract

“…Linguistic validation procedures were performed to obtain an English version of the questionnaire and, subsequently, a French version 20. Finally, after a two-step study and several minor adaptations, the definitive version of the GFQ was proven to be a feasible and practical tool to be used for prospective observational studies in daily practice21 (The GFQ is available in online supplementary appendix 1). The GFQ enabled us to calculate the diagnostic test accuracy of the sense of alarm when applied to dyspnoea and/or chest pain.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of the general practitioner’s sense of alarm when confronted with dyspnoea and/or chest pain: a prospective observational study

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesDyspnoea and chest pain are symptoms shared with multiple pathologies ranging from the benign to life-threatening diseases. A Gut Feelings Questionnaire (GFQ) has been validated to measure the general practitioner’s (GPs) sense of alarm or sense of reassurance. The aim of the study was to estimate the diagnostic test accuracy of GPs’ sense of alarm when confronted with dyspnoea and chest pain.Design and settingsProspective observational study in general practice.ParticipantsPatients aged between 18 and 80 years, consulting their GP for dyspnoea and/or chest pain, were considered for enrolment. These GPs had to complete the GFQ immediately after the consultation.Primary outcome measuresLife-threatening and non-life-threatening diseases have previously been defined according to the pathologies or symptoms in the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC)-2 classification. The index test was the sense of alarm and the reference standard was the final diagnosis at 4 weeks.Results25 GPs filled in 235 GFQ questionnaires. The positive likelihood ratio for the sense of alarm was 2.12 (95% CI 1.49 to 2.82), the negative likelihood ratio was 0.55 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.77).ConclusionsWhere the physician experienced a sense of alarm when a patient consulted him/her for dyspnoea and/or chest pain, the post-test odds that this patient had, in fact, a life-threatening disease was about twice as high as the pretest odds.Trial registration numberNCT02932982.

show abstract

Gut Feelings Questionnaire in daily practice: a feasibility study using a mixed-methods approach in three European countries

Cited by 5 publications

References 19 publications

Patient–physician relationship and use of gut feeling in cancer diagnosis in primary care: a cross-sectional survey of patients and their general practitioners

Patient–physician relationship and use of gut feeling in cancer diagnosis in primary care: a cross-sectional survey of patients and their general practitioners

The linguistic validation of the gut feelings questionnaire in Turkish

Accuracy of the general practitioner’s sense of alarm when confronted with dyspnoea and/or chest pain: a prospective observational study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About