ArticleInternal medicine journal2022
Research activities in general medicine: a scoping survey by the Internal Medicine Society of Australia and New Zealand.
Article in Internal medicine journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evolving practice of general internal medicine in the current medical landscape.Internal medicine journal · 2026Review
- Perceptions, attitudes, and barriers to research engagement among general medicine undergraduates in a tertiary hospital in Guangdong, China.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Measuring variations in healthcare data using run charts and statistical process control charts: a survey of general physicians attending the quality improvement workshop.Internal medicine journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn developing an effective framework for a collaborative research network (RN) that supports members involved in research, the Internal Medicine Society of Australia and New Zealand (IMSANZ) required a better understanding of the current level of research activity and engagement by general physicians, and factors influencing such engagement.
aimsTo explore the current research landscape amongst general physicians in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand.
methodsA questionnaire exploring research participation, scope, research enablers and barriers was disseminated to IMSANZ members over a 3-month period. Core functions of IMSANZ-RN, research priorities, potential solutions to perceived barriers and required level of support were also evaluated.
resultsA total of 82 members, mostly senior medical staff (74.4%), responded to the survey (11.8% response rate). More than 70% were involved in impactful research across multiple disciplines, encompassing a wide range of research themes and topics. However, there is limited support and resources available to conduct research, with most projects being self-instigated and self-funded. There is overwhelming support to increasing the profile of research in general medicine through the establishment of IMSANZ-RN, whose principal purposes, as identified by respondents, are to foster collaboration, promote research, provide research education and training, and share information among general physicians. Quality improvement studies (56.1%) and clinical trials (41.5%) were also identified as priority research types.
conclusionsThis study has profiled the constraints faced by general physicians in conducting high-quality collaborative research and provides insights into what is needed to support greater research engagement, through development of a discipline-specific clinical RN.
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.