ArticleFamily medicine2025
Perceived Value of Family Physicians Inquiries Network Membership: A Qualitative Study.
Article in Family medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- FPIN Could Benefit From Increasing APP Engagement.Family medicine · 2026Article
- The Power of Mentorship in Family Medicine.Family medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesLeaders in academic family medicine founded the Family Physicians Inquiries Network (FPIN) 27 years ago to facilitate scholarship and research in family medicine residency programs. This study evaluates the perceived value of FPIN membership (defined as what members feel FPIN membership adds to their program) by analyzing responses to open-ended questions in the annual membership survey from 2018 to 2023.
methodsThe survey asked questions such as, "Would you recommend FPIN to a friend? Why or why not?" and "Do you believe that the care you are providing patients in your community is better as a result of your involvement with FPIN?" Researchers applied thematic analysis to code and categorize responses into themes that capture a meta-summary of ideas.
resultsOver the 5-year study period, individuals in 109 of the 169 programs (66% of programs) responded to the survey, including 289 responses to open-ended questions. We were unable to calculate an accurate response rate, but our best estimate is about 2%, making the quantitative portion less useful. Qualitative analysis revealed themes of strengths, impact, and areas for improvement. Strengths subthemes included publishing clinically useful summaries, assisting novice writers, welcoming supportive environment, and publishing guidance and feasibility. Impact subthemes included journal impact and objective, and broader visibility. Areas for improvement subthemes included FPIN financial constraints, help desk answers publishing frustrations, and website difficulties.
conclusionsFPIN members responded positively and valued participating in FPIN.
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.