ReviewFamily medicine and community health2026
Uncertainty in general practice: a myth of uniqueness?
Review in Family medicine and community health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Uncertainty is widely regarded as a defining feature of general practice, with its tolerance and management considered core competencies in training and professional identity formation. The effects of uncertainty have educational, economic and clinical implications for general practitioners. There is an axiomatic assertion that uncertainty is unique in general practice: being more present, more keenly experienced and of more personal and clinical consequence than in other medical specialties. This truism exists in the absence of supporting empirical evidence, potentially exposing it as a medical education myth. Understanding where the myth originates and how it is perpetuated is important, particularly for those experiencing and learning about uncertainty.To examine this claim, a review of the existing literature was conducted, followed by a historical analysis to trace the origins and perpetuation of this belief. The notion of uncertainty as a hallmark of general practice emerged alongside its establishment as a distinct specialty, framed as a humanist and relational discipline. Contemporary literature continues to reinforce this view, often positioning uncertainty as a marker of 'good' general practice. Yet, this reinforcement may be shaped by confirmation bias, rooted in the uncritical acceptance of the original claim.Interrogating whether uncertainty is truly unique to general practice, or instead a universal aspect of medical work, can help identify which elements are amenable to educational intervention. Challenging the myth may reduce the perceived burden of uncertainty and foster a growth mindset among learners, encouraging more constructive engagement with uncertainty in both undergraduate and postgraduate settings.
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.