Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25854975›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2015

A cross sectional study of surgical training among United Kingdom general practitioners with specialist interests in surgery.

H J M Ferguson, J E F Fitzgerald, J Reilly, A J Beamish, V J Gokani, Council of the Association of Surgeons in Training

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Day surgery: implications for general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2016
    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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

H J M FergusonThe Association of Surgeons in Training, London, UK University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
J E F FitzgeraldThe Association of Surgeons in Training, London, UK University College London, London, UK Royal Free Hospital, London, UK.
J ReillyThe Association of Surgeons in Training, London, UK Saint John's Hospital, Livingston, West Lothian, UK.
A J BeamishThe Association of Surgeons in Training, London, UK Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, UK Department of Surgery, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg University, Göteborg, Sweden.
V J GokaniThe Association of Surgeons in Training, London, UK University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Council of the Association of Surgeons in Training
Association of Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland · GBQueen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham · GBUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Leicester · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIncreasing numbers of minor surgical procedures are being performed in the community. In the UK, general practitioners (family medicine physicians) with a specialist interest (GPwSI) in surgery frequently undertake them. This shift has caused decreases in available cases for junior surgeons to gain and consolidate operative skills. This study evaluated GPwSI's case-load, procedural training and perceptions of offering formalised operative training experience to surgical trainees.

designProspective, questionnaire-based cross-sectional study. SETTING/

participantsA novel, 13-item, self-administered questionnaire was distributed to members of the Association of Surgeons in Primary Care (ASPC). A total 113 of 120 ASPC members completed the questionnaire, representing a 94% response rate. Respondents were general practitioners practising or intending to practice surgery in the community.

resultsRespondents performed a mean of 38 (range 5-150) surgical procedures per month in primary care. 37% (42/113) of respondents had previously been awarded Membership or Fellowship of a Surgical Royal College; 22% (25/113) had completed a surgical certificate or diploma or undertaken a course of less than 1 year duration. 41% (46/113) had no formal British surgical qualifications. All respondents believed that surgical training in primary care could be valuable for surgical trainees, and the majority (71/113, 63%) felt that both general practice and surgical trainees could benefit equally from such training.

conclusionsThere is a significant volume of surgical procedures being undertaken in the community by general practitioners, with the capacity and appetite for training of prospective surgeons in this setting, providing appropriate standards are achieved and maintained, commensurate with current standards in secondary care. Surgical experience and training of GPwSI's in surgery is highly varied, and does not yet benefit from the quality assurance secondary care surgical training in the UK undergoes. The Royal Colleges of Surgery and General Practice are well placed to invest in such infrastructure to provide long-term, high-quality service and training in the community.

Indexed as

Ambulatory Surgical ProceduresCross-Sectional StudiesEducation, Medical, GraduateFamily PracticeGeneral PracticeGeneral SurgeryHumansPractice Patterns, Physicians'Prospective StudiesSurgical Procedures, OperativeSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited KingdomCommunity SurgeryMEDICAL EDUCATION & TRAININGSURGERYSurgical Training

Identifiers

PMID25854975
PMCPMC4390688
OpenAlexW2107093242

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.