ArticleScandinavian journal of primary health care2025
Care in the era of digital health: experiences from Norwegian general practitioners.
Article in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Impact of Digitalization on European General Practice From the Perspective of General Practitioners: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Exploring AI scribes in Norwegian general practice: a qualitative individual interview study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2026Article
- Professionals' ideals of care in the context of technological innovation in healthcare, a focus group study.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- The Perceptions of Potential Prerequisites for Artificial Intelligence in Danish General Practice: Vignette-Based Interview Study Among General Practitioners.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- Communicative patterns in online health communities: A comparative study of Italian and Polish.PloS one · 2025Article
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
objectiveThis study explores the experiences of General Practitioners (GPs) in Norway, examining the role of care in their practice and the impact of digital health technologies on their caregiving approach.
designA qualitative study employing semi-structured interviews. The data was analysed by systematic text condensation.
settingConducted in various general practice settings within an urban region in southwestern Norway. SUBJECTS: Eleven GPs were interviewed, chosen to reflect a diverse mix of ages, genders, and professional experiences.
resultsThe findings reveal that care occupied a central and multifaceted role in GPs daily practice, and that the care aspect of their practice was experienced as a source of personal fulfilment. Technologies such as Secure Digital Messaging (SDM) and Electronic Health Records could enhance the efficiency of care delivery and facilitate better management of patient interactions, however these technologies also present challenges in maintaining the depth of personal engagement that is central to the care ethics that characterise their caring role. The GPs emphasized the necessity of integrating digital tools in a way that supports the relational and ethical foundations of their caregiving role.
conclusionThis study underscores the enduring importance of care in general practice, even as digital technologies become increasingly prevalent. GPs maintain their caregiving roles by navigating the complexities of digital tools, highlighting the need for a careful balance between leveraging digital advancements and preserving the core values of care. The findings suggest a need for ongoing evaluation of digital tools to align them with the ethical foundations of care 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.