The linguistic validation of the gut feelings questionnaire in Turkish.

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.

From the Viscera to First Impressions: Phase-Dependent Cardio-Visual Signals Bias the Perceived Trustworthiness of Faces.

When we see new people, we rapidly form first impressions. Whereas past research has focused on the role of morphological or emotional cues, we asked whether transient visceral states bias the impressions we form. Across three studies (N = 94 university students), we investigated how fluctuations of bodily states, driven by the interoceptive impact of cardiac signals, influence the perceived trustworthiness of faces. Participants less often chose faces presented in synchrony with their own cardiac systole as more trustworthy than faces presented out of synchrony. Participants also explicitly judged faces presented in synchrony with their cardiac systole as less trustworthy. Finally, the presentation of faces in synchrony with participants' cardiac diastole did not modulate participants' perceptions of the faces' trustworthiness, suggesting that the systolic phase is necessary for such interoceptive effects. These findings highlight the role of phasic interoceptive information in the processing of social information and provide a mechanistic account of the role of visceroception for social perception.

Patients' gut feelings seem useful in primary care professionals' decision making.

BACKGROUND: Family physicians' diagnostic gut feelings have proved to be valuable. But what about patients' gut feelings? Research has shown that patients' gut feelings may contribute to their physicians' clinical reasoning. Dutch medical tribunals consider patients' worry useful for doctors' diagnostic process. However, how general practitioners and other primary care professionals recognize gut feelings of patients and deal with them in their decision making is yet unclear. We aim to explore how primary care professionals perceive patients' gut feelings and use this information in their decision-making. METHODS: We interviewed 30 Dutch and Belgian primary care professionals, exploring how they recognize and value patients' gut feelings. We coded all interviews using a descriptive content analysis in an iterative process. Data sufficiency was achieved. RESULTS: Primary care professionals acknowledged gut feelings in their patients, and most participants found them a useful source of information. Patients' gut feelings might alert them to possible hidden problems and might provide quicker insight into patients' perceptions. Primary care professionals listed a whole series of wordings relating to trusting or distrusting the situation or to any changes in normal patterns. A patient's gut feeling was often a reason for the professionals to explore patients' worries and to reconsider their own clinical reasoning. CONCLUSIONS: Primary care professionals regularly considered patients' gut feelings useful, as they might contribute to their clinical reasoning and to a deeper understanding of the patient's problem. The next step could be to ask patients themselves about their gut feelings and explore their diagnostic value.

Prospective Observational Study on the Prevalence and Diagnostic Value of General Practitioners' Gut Feelings for Cancer and Serious Diseases.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) have recognized the presence of gut feelings in their diagnostic process. However, little is known about the frequency or determinants of gut feelings or the diagnostic value of gut feelings for cancer and other serious diseases. OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of gut feelings in general practice, examine their determinants and impact on patient management, and measure their diagnostic value for cancer and other serious diseases. DESIGN: This prospective observational study was performed using the Gut Feelings Questionnaire (GFQ). PARTICIPANTS: Participants included 155 GPs and 1487 of their patients, from four Spanish provinces. MAIN MEASURES: Sociodemographic data from patients and GPs; the reasoning style of GPs; the characteristics of the consultation; the presence and kind of gut feeling; the patient's subsequent contacts with the health system; and new cancer and serious disease diagnoses reported at 2 and 6 months post-consultation. KEY RESULTS: GPs experienced a gut feeling during 97% of the consultations: a sense of reassurance in 75% of consultations and a sense of alarm in 22% of consultations. A sense of alarm was felt at higher frequency given an older patient, the presence of at least one cancer-associated symptom, or a non-urban setting. GPs took diagnostic action more frequently after a sense of alarm. After 2 months, the sense of alarm had a sensitivity of 59% for cancer and other serious diseases (95% CI 47-71), a specificity of 79% (95% CI 77-82), a positive predictive value of 12% (95% CI 9-16), and a negative predictive value of 98% (95% CI 86-98). CONCLUSIONS: Gut feelings are consistently present in primary care medicine, and they play a substantial role in a GP's clinical reasoning and timely diagnosis of serious disease. The sense of alarm must be taken seriously and used to support diagnostic evaluation in patients with a new reason for encounter.

Embracing complexity with systems thinking in general practitioners' clinical reasoning helps handling uncertainty.

Clinical reasoning in general practice is increasingly challenging because of the rise in the number of patients with multimorbidity. This creates uncertainty because of unpredictable interactions between the symptoms from multiple medical problems and the patient's personality, psychosocial context and life history. Case analysis may then be more appropriately managed by systems thinking than by hypothetic-deductive reasoning, the predominant paradigm in the current teaching of clinical reasoning. Application of "systems thinking" tools such as causal loop diagrams allows the patient's problems to be viewed holistically and facilitates understanding of the complex interactions. We will show how complexity levels can be graded in clinical reasoning and demonstrate where and how systems thinking can have added value by means of a case history.

How child health care physicians struggle from gut feelings to managing suspicions of child abuse.

AIM: We examined how gut feelings of child health care physicians' (CHCPs) contribute to the development of a suspicion of child abuse, how they act upon this suspicion and what barriers they experience in their management. To gain insight into the youth health care chain, we compared the diagnostic reasoning and management regarding this issue by CHCPs and family physicians (FPs). METHODS: Three focus groups, 20 CHCPs, thematic content analysis. RESULTS: A gut feeling acted as an early alert to look for the triggering cue(s), by observing more closely and asking relevant questions. CHCPs struggled to distinguish whether the situation involved child abuse or a lack of parenting skills, and how to communicate their concerns with parents. They tried to motivate parents to improve the situation, avoiding the term child abuse and considered involving the Child Abuse Counselling and Reporting Centre (CACRC) a measure of last resort only. CONCLUSION: As with FPs, gut feelings support CHCPs in becoming attentive to child abuse and to situations which can lead to child abuse. The next step, discussing their suspicion with the parents, is a difficult one, and the CACRC might actually help to make this step easier.

GPs' suspicion of child abuse: how does it arise and what is the follow-up?

Background: Child abuse is widespread, occurs in all cultures and communities, remains undiscovered in 90% of cases and has serious long-term effects. Physicians generally underidentify and underreport child abuse. To understand this low reporting rate and how the suspicion of child abuse arises, we examined GPs' experiences.Research questions: How does the suspicion of child abuse arise in GPs' diagnostic reasoning? How do they act upon their suspicion and which barriers do they encounter in their management?Methods: Twenty-six GPs participated in four focus groups. We used purposive sampling to include GPs with different levels of experience. We performed a thematic content analysis.Results: Suspicion of child abuse arose from common triggers and a gut feeling that 'something is wrong here'. GPs acted upon their suspicion by gathering more data, through history taking and physical examination. They often found it difficult to decide whether a child was abused, because parents, despite good intentions, may simply lack parenting skills and have different values. Clear signs of sexual abuse and physical violence were institutionally reported by GPs, whereas in less clear-cut cases they followed them up and built a supporting network of professionals around the family.Conclusions: A low child abuse reporting rate by GPs to CACRC does not mean a low detection rate. In trying to improve a child's situation, GPs make use of patients' trust in their doctor by involving other professionals. Awareness of the role of gut feelings in developing a suspicion may increase early detection and preventive actions.Key pointsPhysicians generally underidentify and underreport child abuse.Suspicion of child abuse arose from common triggers and a gut feeling that 'something is wrong here'.GPs acted upon their suspicion by gathering more data, through history taking and physical examination.GPs found it difficult to decide whether a child was abused, because parents, despite good intentions, may lack parenting skills.

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

OBJECTIVES: Dyspnoea 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 SETTINGS: Prospective observational study in general practice. PARTICIPANTS: Patients 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 MEASURES: Life-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. RESULTS: 25 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). CONCLUSIONS: Where 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 NUMBER: NCT02932982.

Gut feeling: A grounded theory study to identify clinical educators' reasoning processes in putting students on a learning contract.

AIM: To develop a substantive theoretical explanation that makes sense of the decision-making process that clinical instructors use to place students on a learning contract. BACKGROUND: Clinical instructors are challenged with the task of objectively evaluating students using subjective tools such as anecdotal notes, diaries, unstructured observations and verbal feedback from other nurses. Clinical instructors' assessment decisions have a considerable impact on a variety of key stakeholders, not least of all students. DESIGN: Grounded theory method and its heuristic tools including the logic of constant comparison, continuous memoing and theoretical sampling to serve conceptualisation were used in the process of data collection and analysis. METHODS: Seventeen individual semi-structured interviews with clinical instructors in one university in Western Canada were conducted between May 2016-May 2017. Data were analysed using open, axial and selective coding consistent with grounded theory methodology. The study was checked for the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) criteria (See Appendix S1). FINDINGS: Three subcategories, "brewing trouble," "unpacking thinking" and "benchmarking" led to the study's substantive theoretical explanation. "Gut feeling" demonstrates how clinical instructors reason in their decision-making process to place a student on a learning contract. CONCLUSION: Placing a student on a learning contract is impacted by personal, professional and institutional variables that together shift the process of evaluation towards subjectivity, thus influencing students' competency. A system-level approach, focusing on positive change through implementing innovative assessment strategies, such as using a smart phone application, is needed to provide some degree of consistency and objectivity. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Making visible the objective assessments currently being done by clinical instructors has the potential to change organisational standards, which in turn impact patient and clinical outcomes.

Prevalence and diagnostic value of GPs' gut feelings for cancer and serious diseases: protocol for a prospective observational study of diagnostic validity.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer diagnosis in primary care is an important challenge for general practitioners (GPs) due to the relatively low frequency of any single type of cancer and the heterogeneous signs and symptoms that can be present. In addition to analytical reasoning, GPs may become aware of gut feelings (GFs) as they suspect that a patient may have cancer or another serious disease. We aimed to investigate the prevalence and the predictive value of GFs for the diagnosis of cancer and serious diseases. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Prospective observational study of diagnostic validity. Participation will be offered to GPs from Majorca and Zaragoza (Spain). They will recruit all patients with a new reason for encounter during one or two workdays. GPs will complete the Gut Feelings Questionnaire (GFQ). Variables regarding patient, GP and consultation will be collected. Two and 6 months after the first visit, incident diagnoses of cancer or other serious diseases, diagnostic tests performed, referrals and new visits will be recorded. Analysis will include a descriptive analysis of the variables and prevalence of GFs, and the sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and likelihood ratios of the GFs (sense of alarm and sense of reassurance) for diagnosing cancer and other serious diseases, as measured with the GFQ. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has obtained approval from the Majorcan Primary Care Research Committee and from the Balearic Islands Ethical Committee, with reference number IB 3210/16 PI. The results may help GPs to make more accurate decisions about which patients need further examinations to rule out or to confirm a diagnosis of cancer or a serious disease, and which ones do not. The results will be published as part of the PhD project of the first author and in open access journals, and will be presented at medical conferences.

Cross-cultural translation and validation of the 'gut feelings' questionnaire into Spanish and Catalan.

BACKGROUND: The gut feelings questionnaire (GFQ) is the only tool developed to assess the presence of a 'sense of alarm' or a 'sense of reassurance' in the diagnostic process of general practitioners (GPs). It was created in Dutch and English and has validated versions in French, German and Polish. OBJECTIVES: To obtain a cross-cultural translation of the GFQ into Spanish and Catalan and to assess the structural properties of the translated versions. METHODS: A six-step procedure including forward and backward translations, consensus, and cultural and linguistic validation was performed for both languages. Internal consistency, factor structure, and content validity were assessed. RESULTS: Internal consistency was high for both questionnaires (Cronbach's alpha for GFQ-Spa = 0.94 and GFQ-Cat = 0.95). The principal component analysis identified one factor with the sense of alarm and the sense of reassurance as two opposites, explaining 76% of the total variance for the GFQ-Spa, and 77% for the GFQ-Cat. CONCLUSION: Spanish and Catalan versions of the GFQ were obtained. Both have been cross-culturally adapted and showed good structural properties.

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

OBJECTIVES: The validated Gut Feelings Questionnaire (GFQ) is a 10-item questionnaire based on the definitions of the sense of alarm and the sense of reassurance. The purpose of the GFQ is to determine the presence or absence of gut feelings in the diagnostic reasoning of general practitioners (GPs).The aim was to test the GFQ on GPs, in real practice settings, to check whether any changes were needed to improve feasibility, and to calculate the prevalence of the GPs' sense of alarm and sense of reassurance in three different countries. SETTING: Primary care, six participating centres in Belgium, France and the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: We performed a think-aloud study with 24 experienced Dutch GPs, GP trainees and medical clerks who filled in the GFQ after diagnosing each of six case vignettes. We then performed a feasibility study in two phases, using a mixed-method approach, with 42 French and Dutch GPs in the first phase and then 10 Belgian, 10 Dutch and 10 French GPs in the second phase. All GPs filled in the GFQ after each of eight consultations with patients presenting new complaints and were subsequently interviewed about the use of the GFQ. OUTCOME MEASURES: GPs' experiences on using the GFQ in real practice, more specifically the average time needed for filling in the questionnaire.The prevalence of GPs' sense of alarm and sense of reassurance. RESULTS: The modified version of the GFQ, created without altering the sense of the validated items, was easy to use in daily practice. The prevalence of the GPs' sense of alarm occurred during 23%-31% of the included consultations. CONCLUSIONS: After a two-step study and several minor adaptations, the final version of the GFQ proved to be a feasible and practical tool to be used for prospective observational studies in daily practice.

Gut vagal afferents differentially modulate innate anxiety and learned fear.

Vagal afferents are an important neuronal component of the gut-brain axis allowing bottom-up information flow from the viscera to the CNS. In addition to its role in ingestive behavior, vagal afferent signaling has been implicated modulating mood and affect, including distinct forms of anxiety and fear. Here, we used a rat model of subdiaphragmatic vagal deafferentation (SDA), the most complete and selective vagal deafferentation method existing to date, to study the consequences of complete disconnection of abdominal vagal afferents on innate anxiety, conditioned fear, and neurochemical parameters in the limbic system. We found that compared with Sham controls, SDA rats consistently displayed reduced innate anxiety-like behavior in three procedures commonly used in preclinical rodent models of anxiety, namely the elevated plus maze test, open field test, and food neophobia test. On the other hand, SDA rats exhibited increased expression of auditory-cued fear conditioning, which specifically emerged as attenuated extinction of conditioned fear during the tone re-exposure test. The behavioral manifestations in SDA rats were associated with region-dependent changes in noradrenaline and GABA levels in key areas of the limbic system, but not with functional alterations in the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal grand stress. Our study demonstrates that innate anxiety and learned fear are both subjected to visceral modulation through abdominal vagal afferents, possibly via changing limbic neurotransmitter systems. These data add further weight to theories emphasizing an important role of afferent visceral signals in the regulation of emotional behavior.