ArticleBMC medical education2019
How do Lebanese patients perceive the ideal doctor based on the CanMEDS competency framework?
Article in BMC medical education, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The emerging trends of healthcare professions' ethics education in recent 10 years: a systematic review.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Expectations of cardiovascular patients: Which factors stand out in healthcare service delivery?BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Patient perspectives on physician competence: Validation of the CanMEDS framework.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Competency frameworks, nursing perspectives, and interdisciplinary collaborations for good patient care: Delineating boundaries.Nursing philosophy : an international journal for healthcare professionals · 2023Article
- 'Good' and 'bad' doctors - a qualitative study of the Austrian public on the elements of professional medical identity.Medical education online · 2022Article
- Parents' knowledge, attitude and practice towards children's vaccination in Lebanon: role of the parent-physician communication.BMC public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDuring their training, Lebanese medical students develop a high medical expertise but are not focusing on other competencies such as communication, collaboration, erudition, professionalism, leadership and health promotion. There is also insufficient data about patients' preference for these skills. This study describes the different weights patients attribute to these physician's competencies.
methodsThis is a cross-sectional study based on a questionnaire distributed to 133 Lebanese patients. It included 15 questions assessing how patients prioritize the physician's competencies, with open-ended questions asking them to define "the good doctor". Krippendorff's alpha coefficient was used to analyze the reliability of the competencies' classification.
resultsOne hundred twenty five patients completed the questionnaire in this cross-sectional study. Their mean age was 48 ± 16.76 years. When classifying competencies, 73.6% opted for medical expertise as first choice and 48% put communication as second. Based on the Krippendorff's coefficient, we identified a moderate agreement for the seven choices (alpha = 0.44). In open-ended questions, patients defined the good doctor in 325 answers: 64.3% mentioned medical expertise, 34.1% high ethics and 26.2% communication.
conclusionsThis patient-centered study concurs well with the worldwide practice that puts medical expertise at the center of medical education. However Lebanese patients don't perceive equally other competencies and favor professionalism and communication that should be integrated in priority in students' curricula.
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.