Today, we’re speaking to Flo Martin, an honorary research associate at the University of Bristol.

Title of paper: First trimester antidepressant use and miscarriage: a comprehensive analysis in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD

Available at: https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2025.0092

Antidepressant use during pregnancy is rising, with concerns from pregnant women that these medications may increase the risk of miscarriage if taken prenatally. Evidence is conflicting so we used the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, a large repository of UK-based primary care data, and a range of methods to investigate antidepressant use during trimester one and risk of miscarriage.

Transcript

This transcript was generated using AI and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Please be aware it may contain errors or omissions.

Speaker A

00:00:00.240 - 00:00:52.800

Hello and welcome to BJJP Interviews. I'm Nada Khan and I'm one of the associate editors at the bjgp. Thanks for taking the time today to listen to this podcast.

In today's episode, we're speaking to Dr. Flo Martin, an honorary research associate at the University of Bristol.

We're here to look at the paper she's recently published here in the BJGP titled First Trimester Antidepressant Use and Miscarriage A Comprehensive Analysis in the Clinical Practice Research Data Link. Gold. So, hi, Flo, it's great to meet you and talk about this research.

And I think this paper touches on an area that clinicians and women often approach with a bit of uncertainty, just in terms of prescribing safety, really, in pregnancy in general. But can you talk us through what we know already about prescribing for antidepressants and risk in pregnancy, just to frame what you've done here?

Speaker B

00:00:53.280 - 00:02:22.860

Yeah, absolutely.

So we actually did some work a couple of years ago doing a systematic review of the literature in this space, so looking at antidepressant use during pregnancy and the risk of miscarriage. And the work spanned the last kind of 30 years.

And what we found was a 30% increase in risk of miscarriage following antidepressant use during pregnancy. And this was obviously kind of alarming to see this increase in risk. But the kind of key takeaway from the paper was not actually this finding.

It was mostly the kind of variation in the literature that we observed when answering this question.

We kind of were very cautious about interpreting this 30% increase in risk as a kind of true causal effect because we had observed these other things that might be driving the estimate kind of upwards and might not necessarily show the true effect that was happening in this population. So that was kind of the environment that we were existing in before we started the study.

And it really informed the way that we wanted to do this study.

So we thought it was really important to try and understand that baseline risk in both unexposed and exposed pregnancies, so that whatever we observed was contextualized against what the underlying risk was among those who hadn't been prescribed antidepressants.

Speaker A

00:02:23.500 - 00:02:58.120

Yeah, fair enough.

So this is a large analysis of the clinical practice research data link, and you looked at pregnancies between 1996 and 2016 and then followed up women who had been prescribed or not antidepressants and risk of miscarriage.

And I think if people are specifically interested in how you did this, they can go back to the paper and look at some of the different methods you used. But I...

Today, we’re speaking to Claire Mann, a Research Fellow who is based at the University of Warwick, and Sarah Hillman, who is a GP and Clinical Associate Professor based at the University of Birmingham.

Title of paper: Accessing Equitable Menopause Care in the Contemporary NHS – Women’s Experiences

Available at: https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2024.0781

Menopause awareness has increased in recent years, as well as HRT use, however, this has not been experienced equally. Cultural influences such as stigma, preferences for non-medical approaches, perceptions of ailments appropriate for healthcare, lack of representation, work against women seeking help. GPs should not assume all women who would benefit from HRT will advocate for it. They ought to initiate discussions about potential HRT, as well as other approaches, with all presenting women who may benefit.

Transcript

This transcript was generated using AI and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Please be aware it may contain errors or omissions.

Speaker A

00:00:00.240 - 00:01:12.020

Hello and welcome to BJGP Interviews. I'm Nada Khan and I'm one of the Associate editors of the bjgp. Thanks for taking the time today to listen to this podcast.

In today's episode, we're talking to Claire Mann, a research fellow who's based at the University of Warwick, and Sarah Hillman, who is a GP and Clinical Associate professor based at the University of Birmingham.

We're here to discuss the recent paper published here in the BJGP titled Accessing Equitable Menopause Care in the Contemporary NHS Women's Experiences. Thanks, Claire and Sarah, for joining me here today to talk about this work.

This study focuses particularly on the women's experience of menopause and accessing general practice and primary care. But I'll point out just before we begin that you've also published a linked paper looking at the clinician perspective.

So anyone who's interested in that angle should look up your other paper. But back to this one. Sarah, I wonder if I could start with you first.

I wonder if you could just talk us through the focus of the paper here and the kind of disparities that different women might face in accessing menopause care in the UK.

Speaker B

00:01:13.620 - 00:02:57.750

Essentially, this work came about because in 2020, we published a piece of work in the BJGP that looked at prescribing a practice level of hrt.

And what we found was that actually, if you were a patient at one of the most deprived practices in England, you were about a third less likely to be prescribed HRT than if you were in the most affluent. What we didn't have at that point in time was data at an individual level, just at a practice level.

But it was important that work was done because that really pushed that forwards. But what we didn't understand was what was going on underneath that. So.

So we asked the nihr, we wrote a grant for something called Research for Patient Benefit and said, look, we want to explore exactly why there is this disparity, because our feeling as researchers was that it wasn't straightforward and that there was a lot going on, both from the woman's perspective and the healthcare professional's perspective. And we really wanted to know exactly how that was all adding up to this gap in prescribing.

What we did was we spoke to 40 women, but we were incredibly mindful that we wanted to speak to women that were less likely on paper to be prescribed hrt. So we tried to speak to women that were from more socially economically deprived areas and also black and South Asian women.

So this project

Today, we’re speaking to Dr Luisa Pettigrew, a GP and Research Fellow at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and Senior Policy Fellow at the Health Foundation.

Title of paper: Counting GPs: A comparative repeat cross-sectional analysis of NHS general practitioners

Available at: https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2024.0833

There have been successive Government promises to increase GP numbers. However, the numbers of GPs in NHS general practice depend upon how GPs are defined and how data are analysed. This paper provides a comprehensive picture of trends in GP capacity in English NHS general practice between 2015 and 2024. It shows that the number of fully qualified GPs working in NHS general practice is not keeping pace with population growth and there is increasing variation in the number of patients per GP between practices. We offer research and policy recommendations to improve the consistency and clarity of reporting GP workforce statistics.

Transcript

This transcript was generated using AI and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Please be aware it may contain errors or omissions.

Speaker A

00:00:01.040 - 00:01:04.810

Hello and welcome to BJGP Interviews. I'm Nada Khan and I'm one of the Associate Editors of the Journal. Thanks for taking the time today to listen to this podcast.

In today's episode, we're speaking to Dr. Louisa Pettigrew, who is a GP and research fellow at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

Louisa is also a Senior Policy Fellow at the Health foundation and we're here today to talk about the paper that she's recently published here in the bjgp. The paper is titled Counting A Comparative Repeat Cross Sectional analysis of NHS GPs.

So, hi, Louisa, and thanks for joining me here today to talk about your work. And I guess just to set things out, it is really important to know how many gps there are working.

But I wonder if you could just talk us through what we already know about this. We know that there have been successive government policies and promises to increase the number of gps.

There are, as we know, different ways that gps could be counted.

Speaker B

00:01:05.530 - 00:02:37.470

So, yeah, as you rightly point out, there's been recurrent governance promises to increase GP numbers.

Not just our current Labour government, but the previous Conservative government too, and previous governments too, because they realize that, you know, having access to GP is important for the public and there's a shortage, a perceived shortage of them.

So the issue that we notice that there's different ways to count GPs who are working NHS General practice, and therefore depending on how you choose to count them, then that affects the trends and it affects your numbers.

So you can count a GP by headcount, whether they're working in NHS general practice or not, and you can count them by full time equivalent, so the actual reported numbers of working hours. You can also consider GPs to be fully qualified GPs alone, or you could include GPs who are fully qualified, plus what is categorized as GP trainees.

Now, that category includes GP trainees, but it also includes foundation year one and two doctors and any other sort of junior doctor that might be in general practice. And the other dimension to how you count gps is whether you take population growth into population size.

So in the UK, over the past, sort of between 2015 and 2024, which was a period of analysis of our study, there was about 12% increase in population size in England. So once you take population growth into...

Today, we’re speaking to Jadine Scragg, a researcher based at the University of Oxford, and Sabrina Keating about their recent paper published here in the BJGP.

Title of paper: GPs’ perspectives on GLP-1RAs for obesity management: a qualitative study in England

Available at: https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2025.0065

General practitioners (GPs) play a central role in managing obesity yet face significant challenges due to limited treatment options and resource constraints. GLP-1RAs are emerging as a promising treatment for obesity but access in primary care is limited. This study provides new insights into GPs’ perspectives on the integration of GLP-1RAs into primary care, highlighting concerns around resource limitations, health equity, and misuse of the medications.

Transcript

This transcript was generated using AI and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Please be aware it may contain errors or omissions.

Speaker A

00:00:01.200 - 00:01:00.730

Hello and welcome to BJGP Interviews. I'm Nada Khan and I'm one of the associate editors of the bjgp. Thanks for taking the time today to listen to this podcast.

Today we're speaking to Judine Scragg, a researcher based at the University Oxford, and Sabrina Keating, a DPHIL student who's also based at the University of Oxford within the Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences.

We're here to talk about their recent paper, published here in the BJJP, titled GP's Perspectives on GLP1 Receptor Agonists for Obesity Management A Qualitative Study in England. So, hi, Judine and Sabrina, it's great to meet you both for this chat.

I guess the first thing to say is that this work is really topical at the moment, especially given current plans to increase the rollout of GLP1 receptor agonists into the community. But, Judine, I'll come to you first and I wonder if you could just tell us a bit more about what you wanted to do in this research and why.

Speaker B

00:01:01.510 - 00:02:25.330

Yeah, absolutely. So, for a long time, as you've said, the GLP1s have been very topical, both in clinical groups and with patients as well.

So I'm first and foremost, I'm a weight management researcher and I've done work in populations with people living with type 2 diabetes and polycystic ovary syndrome. And within those populations, one of the things they've constantly asked about is about GLP1s, when do I qualify? When do I get it around?

And similarly with the gps GP groups as well, there's been a lot of questions, there's lots of media about, you know, both good and bad about GLPs and outlining different people's thought processes and are they good? Are they bad?

So what we sought to do with this was to sort of more robustly work out what it is GPs actually feel about the perceived integration of the GLP1s into primary care to very kind of firmly focus on GP specifically.

And this ended up coming at a really timely point, as midway through the study, the NICE guidance was brought out on outlining the plans for how tirepatide would be rolled out. So it was a really timely piece to find out exactly what they were thinking and feeling about how this may impact them and their patients.

So that's really what we set out to do.

Speaker A

00:02:26.200 - 00:02:55.660

Great.

And this was a qualitative interview study of 25 GPs across England working across different roles, and they all had different experience in weight management services. But I really Just wanted to come on to what you found here.

And let's start with an area that's quite a common issue right now, and I...

Today, we’re speaking to Dr Steph Stockwell, a senior analyst based at RAND Europe.

Title of paper: Evolution of the general practice receptionist role and online services: a qualitative study

Available at: https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2024.0677

The introduction of online systems and services into general practice and the impact on general practice staff has been considered from a clinician perspective, but comparatively little is known about how these introductions have affected the receptionist role. This study highlights that the use of online services is leading to an evolution of the general practice receptionist role. The role is becoming increasingly complex as practices use multiple online systems, which impacts demand management and navigation aspects of the role. Online systems have variable consequences on workload for receptionists, which has potential implications for workflow, consistency of task completion, job satisfaction, and retention and recruitment of these key staff members.

This transcript was generated using AI and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Please be aware it may contain errors or omissions.

Speaker A

00:00:00.320 - 00:00:53.350

Hello and welcome to BJJP Interviews. I'm Nada Khan and I'm one of the Associate Editors of the bjgp. Thanks for listening to this podcast today.

In today's episode, we're speaking to Dr. Steph Stockwell, a senior analyst based at RAND Europe.

We're here to discuss the paper she's published here in the BJGP titled Evolution of the General Practice Receptionist Role and Online Services A Qualitative Study.

So, hi, Steph, it's great to meet and talk about this work and one of the reasons I really wanted to talk about this is that I think it's timely work, given that we know there's an increasing emphasis just in general practice on triage and also the multidisciplinary team. You talk in the introduction of this paper just about the role of receptionists, which has been evolving and changing in recent years.

So just talk us through that a bit.

Speaker B

00:00:53.720 - 00:02:09.550

Yeah. So this work came about because we were doing some work for the wider de facto study, which was a.

An observational, mixed methods study that involved delete reviews, some surveys, ethnographic case studies and some interviews.

And it was whilst I was doing some of the ethnographic case study work that we spent a lot of time around reception staff because they were the ones who were doing most of the digital facilitation, which is the phenomena that we were. Were looking at. It was whilst doing these observations that the idea for this, this paper came to me, as, you know, often the.

The first point of call for, for patients making contact with general practice and they're really crucial for helping to manage that demand and facilitating patient access to care.

But during these observations, I noticed how the perception of what a receptionist did, particularly among patients and the public, was a little bit outdated and the array of technologies and platforms that they were having to manage and, and help patients use as well, was really sort of the stereotype of answering telephone calls.

So, yeah, the rationale for this work sort of came about on the back of that and it made me want to look back at some of the work that we did for the De facto study and to see what sort of impact the online services had on the role of GP receptionists.

Speaker A

00:02:10.030 - 00:02:50.390

Yeah. So you wanted to look, as you mentioned, just at the impact of online services on sort of the evolving role of...

Today, we’re speaking to Dr Sophie McGrath, Consultant Medical Oncologist based at the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and at Kingston Hospital in London.

Title of paper: Management of menopausal symptoms following treatment for hormone receptor positive breast cancer

Available at: https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2025.0264

This transcript was generated using AI and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Please be aware it may contain errors or omissions.

Speaker A

00:00:00.800 - 00:01:11.660

Hello and welcome to BJJP Interviews. My name is Nada Khan and I'm one of the associate editors of the bjgp. Thanks for joining us today to listen to this podcast.

In today's episode, we're speaking to Dr. Sophie McGrath, who is a consultant medical oncologist based at the Royal Morrison NHS Trust and at Kingston Hospital in London.

We're here to talk about the recent analysis article that she and her colleagues have published here in the BJDP titled Management of Menopausal Symptoms Following Treatment for Hormone Receptor Positive Breast Cancer.

And just to point out that these colleagues included not just medical oncologists, but also GPs and patients, which I think has really shaped this article and is one of the reasons why we wanted to highlight it here in the podcast. So, hi Sophie, thanks for meeting me to talk about this article, which I think touches on a really important topic in practice.

But talk us through some of the initial side effects that you discuss in the introduction here. Just in terms of hormone positive breast cancer, what kind of symptoms do women experience generally as a result of endocrine therapy?

Speaker B

00:01:12.220 - 00:02:32.900

So, yeah, thanks very much for asking. And it's a bit of a broad answer that I would give.

I mean, I've focused on, or we have focused on three main symptoms within the article which relate to hot flushes or vasomotor symptoms, also to joint stiffness and pain and swelling, arthralgia, and also to vulvovaginal symptoms, otherwise known as genitourinary syndrome of menopause.

But I think what we've tried to include within the article as well is a table that certainly acknowledges that there are unfortunately many other symptoms that women can get as a result of these medications, essentially mimicking menopausal side effects.

And of course, you know, these might be symptoms that women having already gone through the menopause may have suffered or experienced at some point already.

But actually for a population of premenopausal women, these will be symptoms that they haven't had any experience of yet and can often be quite intense and develop quite suddenly. Whereas often our post menopausal women have had some sort of lead up to this, they've had some experience.

Speaker A

00:02:34.710 - 00:02:44.710

And you work as a medical oncologist. But just talk me through your own experience of working with women who are going through the sort of sudden menopause as you describe as well.

Speaker B

00:02:45.350 - 00:05:50.240

So obviously the focus of the article here is on menopausal side effects in general from the treatments that we use. And we've talked a lot about using our endocrine treatments such as tamoxifen, letrozole.

But actually many of our women also experience menopausal type side effect secondary to the chemotherapies we give them. So I think, you know, there's sort of two groups you often have, particularly premenopausal women who stop their periods whilst on chemotherapy.

That may happen several weeks into their chemotherapy treatment and it can be quite sudden.

You know, they're already dealing with the numerous side...

Today, we’re speaking to Euan Lawson, the Editor in Chief of the BJGP, about a number of issues around editing, the future of the journal and how you can get involved with the BJGP.

Here's a link to the BJGP Research and Publishing Conference: https://bjgp.org/conference

This transcript was generated using AI and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Please be aware it may contain errors or omissions.

Speaker A

00:00:00.400 - 00:00:55.980

Hello and welcome to BJJP Interviews. I'm Nada Khan and I'm one of the associate editors of the bjjp. Thanks for taking the time today to listen to this podcast.

In today's episode, we're speaking to Euan Lawson, who is the editor in chief of the bjjp.

We're going to have a chat about a number of issues around the future of the Journal, around editorial issues and how you can get involved with the BJJP as well. So, hi, Ewan. Yeah, nice to see you. And just wanted to really start by saying thanks for joining me here today for this podcast.

But yeah, thanks for joining me here today, Ewan, just to have a general chat about things going on with BJGP and your role as editor.

And yeah, just a chance to catch up about some of your thoughts about issues around academic publishing and then just have a chat generally about other things that you've been thinking about as editor. So how's your week been?

Speaker B

00:00:57.420 - 00:02:13.730

We've already had that conversation before we got here. Now we won't go there again. As you know, it's not been perhaps my ideal week.

But as I'm delighted to be here and talking a little bit about what's going on with the Journal and just give a little bit of insight into how things are going, perhaps the biggest thing that we're I've recently written about the impact factor at the Journal, and perhaps the most important thing I need to say is that we don't worry too much about the impact factor.

I know we do quite well on the impact factor, but I wrote an editorial which really pointed out that we are much more interested in the real world influence of the journal rather than what is quite a narrow metric about citations. We're more interested in how it affects clinical, how the journal articles affect clinical practice, how they affect policy.

And we're really pushing, trying to push in that direction.

And once we get into worrying about the impact factor and there are a lot of perverse kind of incentives in academia and it can sometimes result in what's known as questionable research practices and things can just slide away from the ideal a little bit.

So that's perhaps one of the things that we're trying to concentrate on most in this coming months and years is just making sure that we keep our impact all about real world rather than anything else.

Speaker A

00:02:14.130 - 00:02:26.230

Yeah, you mentioned questionable research practices and you did talk about this in your editorial or your editor's briefing, but how do you think the Journal can tackle that head on?

Speaker B

00:02:27.750 - 00:04:23.309

I mean, it is challenging because it's.

The thing about QRP questionable research practices is that there's like they're a spectrum and they go from really very minor stuff, which is like, you know, giving you, a professor in your department authorship on a paper where they really didn't do anything, to a kind of a. The far end of the spectrum where you start to creep into outright research fraud.

And most researchers, and I think particularly in the primary care field though, you know, we'd always got to be. You always. One has to be careful about making assumptions,

Today, we’re speaking to Dr Jo Burgin, a GP and a researcher based at the University of Bristol.

Title of paper: Mental health consultations during the perimenopausal age range – Are GPs and patients on the same page?: A qualitative study

Available at: https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2025.0069

Mood changes are a recognised symptom of perimenopause, for which Hormone Replacement Therapy is considered a first line treatment. Recent studies have found mental health symptoms are overlooked in menopause care, which is mostly delivered in primary care. This study identifies some key barriers to identifying perimenopause in women presenting with mental health symptoms and suggests important changes clinicians could make to their consultations to address this.