ArticleBJGP open2024
Longer in primary care: a mixed-methods study of the Welsh GP training model.
Article in BJGP open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA new model of GP training was introduced in Wales, whereby trainees spend 1 year in hospital and 2 years in general practice (the 1+2 model), a change from the previous model of 18 months in each setting.
aimTo evaluate the 1+2 model of GP training in Wales. DESIGN &
settingLongitudinal mixed-methods evaluation via repeated surveys and focus groups with GP trainers and trainees across the Welsh training schemes.
methodYearly surveys and focus groups were undertaken between June 2020 and December 2022. Quantitative survey data were analysed in SPSS. Qualitative survey data and focus group transcripts were analysed thematically.
resultsSpending more time in general practice was seen as a major benefit. The consensus was that general practice is the best place to learn essential consultation skills. Furthermore, general practice was viewed as a flexible educational setting where knowledge gaps can be addressed. The main concern about the 1+2 model was that trainees would miss experience of key specialties. However, as trainees progressed through the training programme, this concern diminished. All trainees and most trainers thought that the benefits of the 1+2 model outweighed drawbacks.
conclusionSpending more time in general practice during GP training appears to improve how prepared trainees felt for practice. Future changes should explore options to enhance hospital experience without reducing time spent in general practice.
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.