Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39107616›Full record

ArticleWiener klinische Wochenschrift2025

The future of general practice and family medicine in Austria.

Susanne Rabady

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Susanne RabadyDivision General and Family Medicine, Department of General Health Studies, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Dr. Karl-Dorrek-Straße 30, 3500, Krems, Austria. susanne.rabady@kl.ac.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3603-5841

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

General practice/family medicine has recently been recognized as a medical discipline in Austria. This paper is a short report on the prevailing understanding of its goals and subjects, comparing the Austrian perception with international definitions. It comments on shortcomings and introduces an outline for the development of a revised professional theory.At present, there is no clear uniform image of the discipline, neither among the general public, nor among physicians, healthcare professionals or decision makers. The reason for this lies in the historical development which, with the triumph of specialization, has led to a loss of importance for generalist medicine. Now it is the fragmentation that extensive specialization entails that gives a new meaning to generalist, contextual and patient-centered medicine.This change needs to be analyzed and understood. A description of the responsibilities, tasks and very specific methods unique to the discipline will be developed, which should enable the sensible, contemporary use of general practice/family medicine for the benefit of patients and the healthcare system.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareFamily PracticeGeneral PracticeAustriaForecastingHumansSpecializationContextual medicineDefragmentationGeneralist medicinePrimary care physicianProfessional theory

Identifiers

PMID39107616
PMCPMC11794389

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.