Journals Library

An error occurred retrieving publication content to display, please try again.

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

Communication of cardiovascular disease risk in Health Checks is brief and practitioner dominated, which often results in misunderstandings and could increase the risk of a maladaptive coping response, particularly when using QRISK®2.

{{author}}{{author}}{{($index > metadata.AuthorsAndEtalArray.length-1) ? ',' : '.'}}

Christopher J Gidlow 1,*, Naomi J Ellis 1, Lisa Cowap 2, Victoria Riley 1, Diane Crone 3, Elizabeth Cottrell 4, Sarah Grogan 5, Ruth Chambers 6, David Clark-Carter 2

1 Centre for Health and Development, School of Life Sciences and Education, Staffordshire University, Stoke-on-Trent, UK
2 Centre for Psychological Research, School of Life Sciences and Education, Staffordshire University, Stoke-on-Trent, UK
3 Cardiff School of Sport and Health Sciences, Cardiff Metropolitan University, Cardiff, UK
4 School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, Newcastle-under-Lyme, UK
5 Department of Psychology, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK
6 Stoke-on-Trent Clinical Commissioning Group, Stoke-on-Trent, UK
* Corresponding author Email: c.gidlow@staffs.ac.uk

Declared competing interests of authors: Elizabeth Cottrell was a member of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Primary Care, Community and Preventive Interventions (PCCPI) (2014–18) and the NIHR HTA Prioritisation Committee A (2014–20). Elizabeth Cottrell also reports income as a general practice partner within a surgery that performs NHS Health Check, outside the submitted work. Ruth Chambers and Christopher J Gidlow are members of the Expert Scientific Advisory Committee for NHS Health Check.

Funding: {{metadata.Funding}}

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}

https://doi.org/{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation:{{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al. ' : ''}}. {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

Crossmark status check

Report Content

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

If you would like to receive a notification when this project publishes in the NIHR Journals Library, please submit your email address below.

Responses to this report

No responses have been published.

 

If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 14 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors.  Non-relevant comments will be deleted.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions

An error has occurred in processing the XML document