ArticleKorean journal of family medicine2026
Primary care systems in South Korea and Japan: a comparative review.
Article in Korean journal of family medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Health literacy and primary care organization.Korean journal of family medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The primary care system (PCS) is an essential national health infrastructure defined by the delivery of comprehensive, integrated, and accessible services that serve as the patient's first and sustained point of contact with the healthcare system. A comparative review was performed through searches of PubMed, KoreaMed, and J-STAGE databases using terms including "primary care," "general practitioner," "family physician," "gatekeeping," "Korea," and "Japan." Gray literature from the Japan Medical Association, Korea Medical Association, and OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) was also reviewed. Clinical case examples from one author's practice were included to illustrate real-world general practitioner (GP) challenges. Both Japan and South Korea feature universal health insurance but differ substantially in physician training pathways, gatekeeping enforcement, and community care integration. Japan is transitioning toward a kakaritsuke-i (registered home doctor) model with a nascent GP specialty board, whereas South Korea relies primarily on specialist-led private clinics for primary care delivery. International evidence suggests that structured, continuous family physician (FP) training is associated with improved chronic disease management, preventive care utilization, and patient satisfaction. Strengthening South Korea's PCS requires a clearly defined mandatory FP residency framework, reinforced gatekeeping mechanisms, and greater investment in community-based integrated care. Japan's ongoing reforms offer a useful regional comparator, while international FP models provide a proven evidence base for structural improvement.
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.