ArticleJournal of general and family medicine2023
The present circumstances of pediatric practice by family physicians in Japan: Cross sectional research.
Article in Journal of general and family medicine, 2023. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Healthcare-Seeking Behaviors in a Depopulated Rural Area of Shiga Prefecture, Japan in 2025: A Descriptive Study Using the Ecology of Medical Care Model.Journal of general and family medicine · 2026Article
- Gender Differences in Antibiotic Prescriptions and Healthcare Visits Among Caregivers Accompanying Children with Respiratory Tract Infections: A Cross-Sectional Study.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2025Article
- Interconception care during well-child visits by family physicians in the United States: A cross-sectional study.Journal of general and family medicine · 2024Article
- The present circumstances of pediatric practice by family physicians in Japan: Cross sectional research.Journal of general and family medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In Japan, pediatric primary care has often been provided not by general practitioners, but by specialists. Although official pediatric training of general practitioners started in Japan in 2018 no studies to date show the extent to which Japanese general practitioners are committed to pediatric care. Methods: We conducted a questionnaire survey on pediatric training and current pediatric practice for family physicians certified by the Japan Primary Care Association. Results: Of 1067 Japan Primary Care Association certified family physicians, 288 (27%) responded to the survey. More than 90% had received at least 3 months of pediatric training. Family physicians who completed 6 or more months of pediatric training provided significantly more pediatric care ( Conclusions: In Japan, general practitioners are still not actively involved in pediatric care, but they treat patients with diseases that make it difficult to determine the most appropriate department to see and a wide range of age groups. It will become increasingly important to provide learning opportunities and better training environments in these areas with related organizations.
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.