ArticleBMJ open2026
Work-life integration in interprofessional general practice collaboration: a qualitative exploration of different trends among Bavarian general practitioners.
Article in BMJ open, 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
objectivesProblems with healthcare provision in general practice are already present and expected to worsen in the future. Therefore, retaining medical professionals in the long-term. An important factor in deciding on a profession is its compatibility with one's own life. This study aimed to examine general practitioners' working environment, social environment, their current work-life integration and potential changes enabled by interprofessional working concepts.
designA qualitative approach was used, with guided focus group interviews with 37 general practitioners followed by individual interviews with 10 general practitioners. The interviews were verbatim transcribed and analysed using the framework method. The primary analyses were conducted, overall and separately for each gender. A professional group also carried out analyses. The subgroup analyses are based purely on qualitative trends.
resultsBoth genders and all professional groups perceived work-life integration as necessary. Men tended to report a better work-life integration than women. Women were more likely to work part-time and emphasised difficulties with childcare. When establishing interprofessional concepts, participants hope for more opportunities for delegation and co-determination, which can go hand in hand with reduced workload.
conclusionsIn this current study, women tended to perceive a greater degree of double burden both in their job and leisure time than men did. Beyond these gender and professional group differences, there were also tendencies towards differences between women with and without children. The findings indicate that work-life integration is an important factor in the professional setting of general practice. Particularly given the increasing number of female general practitioners, the establishment of part-time and childcare options is necessary.
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.