Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15002420›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2004

The role of UK general practitioners with special clinical interests: implications for policy and service delivery.

Andrew Nocon, Brenda Leese

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. The end is not nigh.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2007
    Article
  14. GPs with special interests: unanswered questions.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2007
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Care closer to home: past mistakes, future opportunities.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2007
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Developing an evidence base for intermediate care delivered by GPs with a special interest.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2005
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Andrew NoconCentre for Research in Primary Care, University of Leeds. b.leese@leeds.ac.uk
Brenda Leese

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The development of specialist clinical interests by general practitioners (GPs) is currently receiving considerable attention in the United Kingdom. Although GPs have long been able to pursue such interests, it is only in recent years that they have taken on within primary care what were previously secondary care tasks, provided such services for patients outside their own practices, and received payment for them. The expansion of such services has been highlighted as a target in the NHS plan for England. Managerial and professional guidance is becoming available that seeks to clarify the role and nature of specialisation within general practice, to learn from the experiences of individuals who have embarked on specialist practice, and suggests procedures for future developments. Drawing on a range of sources, this paper builds on that burgeoning knowledge by setting the development of GPs with special interests in a broader policy context, highlighting the implications for the way that healthcare services are organised and delivered, and discussing their actual and potential impact of professional roles and practice.

Indexed as

SpecializationEnglandFamily PracticeHealth Care ReformHumansPhysician's RolePrimary Health CareProfessional PracticeState Medicine

Identifiers

PMID15002420
PMCPMC1314780

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.