Examining positive views from students, trainees and GPs about general practice: a generational problem? A set of qualitative studies in France.
medical education & training
primary care
qualitative research
Journal
BMJ open
ISSN: 2044-6055
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101552874
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 02 2022
01 02 2022
Historique:
entrez:
2
2
2022
pubmed:
3
2
2022
medline:
23
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
This study aimed to explore the positive factors related to working in general practice in France, from a student studying medicine, trainee general practitioner (GP) and GP point of view. Primary care, France. Nine different qualitative studies involving medical students, trainees and GPs. Sixty-seven medical students, 22 trainees in general practice and 71 GPs. The final codebook contained 66 interpretative codes and 8 positive themes. The themes were general practice as a commitment, doctor-patient care and relationships, skills and competencies in general practice, practice organisation and work-life balance, relationship with the professional community, GPs and university, GPs in the social community and private life, relatives and family. Positive feelings about being a GP are similar throughout the different age groups, from young students to older professionals. This study provided a comprehensive picture of the satisfied GP across different ages. This picture describes GPs as patient-centred professionals who need to have the freedom to choose an efficient working environment, organise their practice, have opportunities for professional development and acquire specific competencies. Both younger and older GPs believe in the future of general practice.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35105565
pii: bmjopen-2021-048857
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-048857
pmc: PMC8808418
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e048857Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
Br J Gen Pract. 2000 Mar;50(452):188-93
pubmed: 10750226
Educ Prim Care. 2020 Mar;31(2):104-111
pubmed: 31964315
Eur J Public Health. 2011 Aug;21(4):499-503
pubmed: 20142402
Med J Aust. 2010 Jul 19;193(2):94-8
pubmed: 20642414
Aust Fam Physician. 2009 May;38(5):341-4
pubmed: 19458806
Fam Med. 2013 Feb;45(2):95-101
pubmed: 23378076
Med Educ. 2010 Jun;44(6):603-12
pubmed: 20604857
Educ Prim Care. 2014 Jul;25(4):202-10
pubmed: 25198714
BMC Fam Pract. 2016 Sep 13;17(1):133
pubmed: 27619913
Fam Pract. 2007 Apr;24(2):138-44
pubmed: 17264070
Aust Fam Physician. 2007 Oct;36(10):877-80
pubmed: 17925914
BMC Fam Pract. 2019 Aug 9;20(1):96
pubmed: 31395016
J Rural Health. 2006 Spring;22(2):189-91
pubmed: 16606433
N Z Med J. 2008 Oct 03;121(1283):59-67
pubmed: 18841186
J Gen Intern Med. 2015 Sep;30(9):1349-58
pubmed: 26173529
BMJ. 1995 Jul 29;311(7000):299-302
pubmed: 7633241
BMJ. 2000 Jan 8;320(7227):114-6
pubmed: 10625273
J Mix Methods Res. 2012 Oct;6(4):317-331
pubmed: 23066379
Rural Remote Health. 2010 Apr-Jun;10(2):1316
pubmed: 20423202
Eur J Gen Pract. 2006;12(4):174-80
pubmed: 17127604
Can Fam Physician. 2007 Feb;53(2):278-86, 277
pubmed: 17872645
J Prim Health Care. 2014 Mar 01;6(1):56-63
pubmed: 24624412
Can Fam Physician. 2012 Nov;58(11):e649-57
pubmed: 23152472
Aust J Prim Health. 2012;18(4):289-94
pubmed: 22951145