ArticleAtencion primaria2005
[What are users views of medical residents attending primary care consultations?].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- [Do our patients know what a family medicine resident is?].Atencion primaria · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo find what users think of the presence of medical residents (MIR) at primary care consultations.
designObservational and cross-sectional descriptive study.
settingUrban health centre. PATIENTS: 421 patients, selected by systematic sampling, attending consultations of MIR tutors.
methodA structured questionnaire was drawn up, with some closed questions with multiple-option replies on the Likert scale; and others with a yes/no or "indifferent" reply. The questionnaires were filled out in the waiting-rooms.
results100% (63% women, 37% men) answered the questionnaire. 71% preferred to be seen by the same doctor; and 68% thought they were better treated if they were always seen by the same doctor. 89% thought that the presence of the resident was a necessary part of his/her training; 90% were not bothered by his/her presence during the consultation; 82% thought the resident did not obstruct in any way their relationship with the doctor; 94% thought that the presence of the resident had never stopped them mentioning something important; 55% thought that patients had the right to an opinion on the presence of the resident.
conclusionsMost patients valued the presence of residents at consultations positively and thought it a necessary part of their training.
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.