Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38253547›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2024

General practice-related MeSH terms in main journals: a bibliometric analysis from 2011 to 2021.

Théo Duguet, Gladys Ibanez, Matthieu Schuers, Jean-Pierre Lebeau, Kristell Roser, Cécilia Saldanha Gomes, Jean-Sébastien Cadwallader

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Théo DuguetDepartment of General Practice, Sorbonne University, Paris.ORCID 0000-0002-3971-1905
Gladys IbanezDepartment of General Practice, Sorbonne University, Paris, and INSERM, Sorbonne University, Institut Pierre Louis d'Épidémiologie et de Santé Publique (IPLESP), Paris.ORCID 0000-0002-5592-699X
Matthieu SchuersDepartment of General Medicine, Rouen University Hospital, Rouen; Department of Biomedical Informatics, CHU Rouen, Rouen, and INSERM U 1142, LIMICS.ORCID 0000-0002-7355-4560
Jean-Pierre LebeauDepartment of General Practice, University of Tours, Tours.ORCID 0000-0002-6847-999X
Kristell RoserInter-University Health Library, Medicine-Odontology Center, Paris.ORCID 0009-0005-3852-0604
Cécilia Saldanha GomesDepartment of General Practice, Sorbonne University, Paris, and INSERM, Sorbonne University, Institut Pierre Louis d'Épidémiologie et de Santé Publique (IPLESP), Paris.ORCID 0000-0003-2020-0045
Jean-Sébastien CadwalladerDepartment of General Practice, Sorbonne University, Paris, and INSERM, Sorbonne University, Institut Pierre Louis d'Épidémiologie et de Santé Publique (IPLESP), Paris.ORCID 0000-0001-5495-8431

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere are various Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms used to index general practice research, without consistency.

aimTo understand how general practice-related research is indexed in the main general practice journals between 2011 and 2021, and to analyse the factors that influenced the choice of the general practice-related MeSH. DESIGN AND

settingThis was a quantitative bibliometric study conducted on MEDLINE.

methodMeSH were selected according to the international definition of General Practice/Family Medicine: 'General Practice', 'Primary Health Care', 'Family Practice', 'General Practitioners', 'Physicians, Primary Care', and 'Physicians, Family'. Their use was studied from 2011 to 2021 on MEDLINE, reviewing the 20 general practice journals with the highest impact factors. A descriptive and analytical approach was used; the association of the country, journal, and year with the choice of general practice-related MeSH terms was analysed.

resultsA total of 8514 of 150 286 articles (5.7%) were using one of the general practice-related MeSH terms. The most used were 'Primary Health Care' (4648/9984, 46.6%) and 'General Practice' (2841/9984, 28.5%). A total of 80.0% (6172/7723) of the articles were related to the UK or US and 71.0% (6055/8514) of the articles came from four journals (

conclusionImportant variations in the indexation of general practice research were found. Researchers should consider combining 'Primary Health Care' and 'General Practice' in their PubMed searches to access all the general practice research, regardless of their country of origin.

Indexed as

Medical Subject HeadingsPeriodicals as TopicBibliometricsFamily PracticeHumansbibliometricsfamily physicians, primary carefamily practicegeneral practicegeneral practitionersphysicians, primary health care

Identifiers

PMID38253547
PMCPMC10824350

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.