ArticleMedical humanities2025
Exploring the GP-patient relationship: a historical narration.
Article in Medical humanities, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- International Generalist Physicians' Conceptions of Generalism: "The Way," "The Privilege," and "The Indescribable Whole".Annals of family medicine · 2026Article
- Continuity of Primary Care in Community Health Centers.Annals of family medicine · 2026Article
- Antibiotic Resistance Awareness and Prescribing Behavior Among General Practitioners in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
The relationship between patients and their doctor is a fundamental concept-particularly within general practice. Many patients and general practitioners (GPs) have a 'common-sense' recognition of the interpersonal connection, usually over time, that makes a relationship meaningful. GPs have consistently striven to emphasise the importance of this connection. While much research has explored the components and influences affecting intersubjective connections, less attention has focused on how the historical, professional, sociopolitical and philosophical contexts have influenced their experience and portrayal. However, recent claims of a crisis in UK general practice resulting from declining relational encounters suggest these are important considerations. In this paper, episodic narration (chronicling) is used to explore five different ages of UK general practice: the emergent period (1815-1948); the expansion of coverage (1949-1965); the professionalisation of general practice (1966-1988); the age of marketisation and neoliberalisation (1989-2004); and the age of technology and fragmentation (2004-present day). A range of sources illustrate micro and macro viewpoints within each period-personal reflections, professional publications, political directives or policies, and representations from the fields of art and literature. This allows for a deeper exploration of contextual influences on the codification and enactment of GP-patient relationships over time and their interpretation and perception. Significant epidemiological and biomedical realities and their respective social interpretation(s), the socioprofessional nature of the GP, that is, their role, societal position and framework of practice, and broader sociopolitical and philosophical factors are explored. Ideological frameworks (from socialism to free market policies and neoliberalism) were particularly important. These determine approaches to funding, service/provider structures, and regulation and governance, which incentivise, enable, or inhibit choices and behaviours among individuals and society, thus impacting the enactment of the GP-patient relationship. If meaningful GP-patient connections are valuable and desirable-as GPs consistently claim they are-we require an honest discussion about the contexts necessary to enable and retain them.
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.