ArticleBJGP open2020
Intellectual stimulation in family medicine: an international qualitative study of student perceptions.
Article in BJGP open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Barriers and facilitators to primary care research: views of GP trainees and trainers.BJGP open · 2022Article
- The praxis of generalism in family medicine: Six concepts (6Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2021Article
- Article
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 at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGlobally, medical schools struggle to ensure there is a sufficient number of graduates choosing family medicine as a career to meet societal needs. While factors impacting career choice are complex, one possible disincentive to choosing family medicine is the perception that it is less intellectually stimulating than specialty care.
aimThe study sought to elicit student views on intellectual stimulation in family medicine, and their understanding of academic family medicine. DESIGN &
settingThis is a qualitative focus group study of volunteer students from the University of Calgary, Canada, and Newcastle University, UK.
methodSix focus groups were conducted with 51 participants. The data were analysed thematically.
resultsStudents associated intellectual stimulation in family medicine with clinical practice. Intellectual stimulation was related to problem solving and the challenge of having to know a little about everything, along with clinical uncertainty and the need to be vigilant to avoid missing diagnoses. Student awareness of academic family medicine was limited, and students identified it with teaching rather than research.
conclusionPromoting intellectual stimulation in family medicine requires educators to highlight the breadth and variety of knowledge required in family medicine, as well as the need to manage clinical uncertainty and to be vigilant to avoid missing diagnoses. Exposure to academic family medicine could enhance students' understanding and appreciation of the role of research in family medicine.
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.