ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2003
Evaluation of extended training for general practice in Northern Ireland: qualitative study.
Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Aligning family medicine residency learning outcomes with societal needs: a nominal group study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- General practice trainee, supervisor and educator perspectives on the transitions in postgraduate training: a scoping review.Family medicine and community health · 2024Article
- How well are Swiss French physicians prepared for future practice in primary care?BMC medical education · 2018Article
- Saplings into oaks.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2010Article
- General practice specialty training: an innovative programme.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2006Article
- The 2005 Rose Prize Essay. GP Education in Northern Ireland 1920-1990. A study of the use and misuse of power.The Ulster medical journal · 2006Article
- The training capacity of general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2005Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate participants' perceptions of the impact on them of an additional six months' training beyond the standard 12 month general practice vocational training scheme.
designQualitative study using focus groups.
settingGeneral practice vocational training in Northern Ireland.
participants13 general practitioner registrars, six of whom participated in the additional six months' training, and four trainers involved in the additional six months' training.
main outcome measures: Participants' views about their experiences in 18 month and 12 month courses.
resultsParticipants reported that the 12 month course was generally positive but was too pressurised and focused on examinations, and also that it had a negative impact on self care. The nature of the learning and assessment was reported to have left participants feeling averse to further continuing education and lacking in confidence. In contrast, the extended six month component was reported to have restimulated learning by focusing more on patient care and promoting self directed learning. It developed confidence, promoted teamwork, and gave experience of two practice contexts, and was reported as valuable by both ex-registrars and trainers. However, both the 12 and 18 month courses left participants feeling underprepared for practice management and self care.
conclusions12 months' training in general practice does not provide doctors with the necessary competencies and confidence to enter independent practice. The extended period was reported to promote greater professional development, critical evaluation skills, and orientation to lifelong learning but does not fill all the gaps.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.