Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42464136›Full record

ArticleBMC primary care2026

Theories and theoretical frameworks used in general practice career choice research: a scoping review.

Faith Yong, Jordan Fox, Priya Martin, Matthew McGrail

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC primary care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Faith YongRural Clinical School, The University of Queensland, Toowoomba, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4878-7565
Jordan FoxRural Clinical School, The University of Queensland, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8367-5297
Priya MartinRural Clinical School, The University of Queensland, Toowoomba, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2092-6551
Matthew McGrailRural Clinical School, The University of Queensland, Rockhampton, Australia. m.mcgrail@uq.edu.au.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6901-8845

Funding

Royal Australian College of General Practice (RACGP) Education Research Grant (ERG) ERG2023-07
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe number of medical graduates choosing to specialise as a general practitioner (GP) has not kept pace with need. Understanding how GP specialisation decisions are made has never been more critical. To date, much of the literature in GP specialisation choice is pragmatic and practice-focused, less strongly underpinned by existing theories or theoretical frameworks relating to the decision-making process of medical students or junior doctors. Our aim was to scope the evidence on the use of theories and theoretical frameworks in general practice career choice selection research.

methodsThe review was conducted and reported in accordance with JBI guidelines and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus databases were searched. Only contexts where specialty decisions mostly occur after medical school graduation (e.g. Australia, United Kingdom) were considered for inclusion. Titles and abstracts of all articles were dual-screened against inclusion criteria, followed by full text review of articles.

resultsAfter removing duplicates, 2,396 titles and abstracts were screened followed by full-text review which identified 30 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Of these, eight were from Australia, 20 from the UK, one from New Zealand, and one was multi-national. Most studies utilised qualitative methodology (N = 21) or mixed methods (N = 6). These draw from 15 distinct theories/frameworks, while 15 studies explained implicit theories. Twenty-two studies produced some form of theory or framework as an outcome within the study. Subsequent citation of these frameworks has generally been low. There was clear agreement that GP career decision-making was complex.

conclusionsOur review identified the application and production of many different frameworks relating to GP specialty decision making, both from adapting explicit theories from a range of disciplines and professions, and identification of implicit theories. Researchers undertaking future studies around general practice career decisions are encouraged to utilise and build upon existing theories and frameworks, rather than creating new ones, to avoid duplication of results.

Indexed as

Career ChoiceGeneral PracticeDecision MakingHumansCareer decision makingGeneral practiceMedical workforcePrimary careSpecialisationTheoretical frameworksTheories

Identifiers

PMID42464136
PMCPMC13656456

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.