Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36162984›Full record

ArticleBMC primary care2022

Ontario family physicians' perspectives about their scope of practice: what is it, what drives it and how does it change?

Sophia M Myles, Elizabeth F Wenghofer, Rachel H Ellaway, Michael T Yeo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC primary care, 2022. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

4 authors.

Sophia M MylesInstitute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, Toronto, ON, M5T 3M6, Canada. s.myles@utoronto.ca.
Elizabeth F WenghoferSchool of Kinesiology and Health Sciences, Laurentian University, 935 Ramsey Lake Road, Sudbury, ON, P3E 2C6, Canada.
Rachel H EllawayDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3330 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 4N1, Canada.
Michael T YeoFaculty of Arts, Laurentian University, 935 Ramsey Lake Road, Sudbury, ON, P3E 2C6, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is little evidence to show what scope of practice (SOP) means from the point of view of family physicians, how family physicians think about their SOP as it changes over time, or what factors shape and influence their SOP. Understanding family physician perspectives on SOP and the factors that influence it can aid our understanding of how it can constrain and enable physicians' agency and autonomy in professional practice.

methodsUsing qualitative description and incorporating constructivist grounded theory data collection and analysis techniques, four focus groups were conducted involving twenty-four Ontario-based family physicians from different contexts, at different career stages, and with different practice experiences.

resultsParticipants' SOP was highly dynamic, changing throughout their careers due to factors both within and beyond their control. Their sense of their own SOP was the product of a continuous cycle of personal and professional transitions, exposures, and experiences throughout their careers. These family physicians sought regular and sustained mentorship, support, and engagement for their SOP throughout their careers. This was particularly the case during professional transitions and for drivers of their SOP for which they felt unprepared early in their careers, such as through the first years of independent practice, and when functioning as owner-operators of medical practices. Four descriptive themes were identified focusing on the nature of their current practice, their professional preparedness and supports, practice management dynamics, and 'doctors are people, too'.

conclusionsThe SOP of the family physicians in this study was dynamic and unique to each individual, it emerged from interactions between their personal and professional lives and identities, and it was embedded in their lived experiences. SOP was also to some extent imposed and externally driven. This study advances understanding by exploring the 'why' and 'how' of SOP rather than focusing solely on what it is.

Indexed as

Physicians, FamilyScope of PracticeGrounded TheoryHumansMentorsOntarioClinical and non-clinical practiceFactorsFamily physiciansLived experienceMedicinePhysician perspectiveScope of practice

Identifiers

PMID36162984
PMCPMC9511454

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.