1,720,965 research outputs found
The Role of General Practice in Complex Health Care Systems
No full textAccording to the WHO, in a complex system, “there are so many interacting parts that it is difficult (…), to predict the behavior of the system based on knowledge of its component parts. “In countries without general practitioner (GP)-gatekeeping, the number of possible interactions and therefore the complexity increases. Patients may consult any doctor without contacting their GP. Family medicine core values, e.g., comprehensive care, and core tasks, e.g., care coordination, might be harder to implement and maintain. How are GPs perceived and how do they perceive themselves if no GP-gatekeeping exists? Does the absence of any GP-gatekeeping influence family medicine core values? A PubMed and Cochrane search was performed. The results are summarized in form of a narrative review. Four perspectives regarding the GP's role were identified. The GPs' self-perception regarding family medicine core values and tasks is independent of their function as gatekeepers, but they appreciate this role. Patient satisfaction is also independent of the health care system. Depending on the acquisition of income, specialists have different opinions of GP-gatekeeping. Policymakers want GPs to play a central role within the health care system, but do not commit to full gatekeeping. The GPs and policymakers emphasize the importance of family medicine specialty training. Further international studies are needed to determine if family medicine core values and tasks can be better accomplished by GP-gatekeeping. Specialty training should be mandatory in all countries to enable GPs to fulfill these values and tasks and to act as coordinators and/or gatekeepers
The Optimizing-Risk-Communication (OptRisk) randomized trial – impact of decision-aid-based consultation on adherence and perception of cardiovascular risk
No full textCoding in general practice-Will the ICD-11 be a step forward?
No full textItem does not contain fulltex
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
- …
