Perceptions of family medicine among long-term patients of a family medicine clinic in Japan: a mixed-methods study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To examine the perceptions of family medicine among patients attending a family medicine clinic for over 10 years in Japan and explore the unique characteristics of a family medicine which was developed in the local community in northern Japan. DESIGN: Explanatory, sequential mixed-method design comprising a survey by questionnaires and semistructured interviews. SETTING: The study was conducted at one of the oldest family medicine primary care clinics in Japan. We surveyed and interviewed participants from November 2019 to March 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 144 patients who have attended a family medicine clinic since April 2009 completed the questionnaires. Semistructured interviews with nine participants were conducted. RESULTS: Among the respondents, 131 (91%) reported having attended a family medicine clinic. In terms of their perceptions of what 'family physicians' do, 42 (35%) stated 'a doctor who treats various diseases with a general view', 34 (29%) stated 'a doctor who treats outpatients and visit patients' houses', and 15 (13%) stated 'a doctor whom one can consult for anything and is familiar with one's family and lifestyle'. The results of the qualitative analysis revealed two themes with regard to patients' perceptions of family medicine: 'seeing the whole person and referring suitably' and 'medical care at home'. Patients' perceptions of family medicine identified in the quantitative study were strongly associated with the characteristics extracted from the qualitative study. CONCLUSION: Patients attending the family medicine clinic had clear perceptions of what family physicians do. The two major perceptions of the characteristics of family medicine were identified as 'seeing the whole person and referring suitably' and 'medical care at home'.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".