What does it mean to be a family physician?: Exploratory study with family medicine residents from 3 countries.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore the conceptions that family medicine residents from 3 countries have of the roles and responsibilities of family physicians in order to gain a better understanding of challenges that might transcend the specific contexts of different health care systems. DESIGN: Qualitative study using focus groups. SETTING: Resident training programs in France, Belgium, and Canada. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 57 residents in the last year of training. METHOD: Ten focus groups were conducted in 3 countries: 2 in France, 3 in Belgium, and 5 in Canada. All focus groups were held in different cities, with residents registered in different universities in France and Canada and with residents from the same university in Belgium. The study was informed by Abbott's conceptual framework on the system of professions. Each 90-minute focus group was moderated by the same researchers. The transcripts were analyzed according to the immersion-crystallization method. MAIN FINDINGS: Respondents shared common conceptions of the family physician's role: continuity of care and patient advocacy were seen as the foundations of the discipline. Respondents also shared a sense of discomfort about how accessible they were expected to be for patients and about the scope of family practice. They saw family medicine as flexible and reported that they strove for balance between their professional and personal life goals. All respondents strongly believed that their profession was undervalued by the medical schools where they trained. CONCLUSION: This exploratory study suggests that there are more similarities than differences in the understanding that future family physicians from different countries have of their discipline and of their careers. We observed a tension between a desire to develop a "new general practice" and the more traditional vision of the discipline. The culture in academic settings appears to contribute to the persistent low appeal of being a primary care physician.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".