In medical care – as an all relationships – words matter.
The term “provider “is a cynical corporate strategy to divide and conquer professionals and patients. We should all – across professions – insist on being called clinicians or professionals, with our own hard-earned credentials recognized.
See this new essay in the Physician Assistant Journal – JAAPA.
This new study follows students over five years and documents long-term, sustained increases in learners entering careers in primary care, direct PC patient care, and service to vulnerable communities. A parallel controlled study backs up these results.
A special report on one key component of the course shows the life-changing impact of visits to observe practicing a family doctor taking care of real patients with real problems.
Phillips WR, Fitch JG, Keys T. Practice observation visit for interprofessional training in primary care. Journal of Interprofessional Education & Practice 2022;29: 100558.doi: 10.1016/j.xjep.2022.100558.
Observation of family physicians in practice – for just a half-day – led to career-changing revelations for students in dentistry, medicine, nursing, pharmacy, physician assistant, social work, and public health. Never underestimate the impact of real experience with real clinicians taking care of real problems and real patients.
New report shows an Interprofessional course is linked to lasting impacts on knowledge, attitudes, and career choices for learners in dentistry, medicine, nursing, pharmacy, physician assistant, social work, and public health.
Phillips WR, Keys T. Interprofessional primary care course impact on knowledge, attitudes, and careers. Family Medicine. 2022;54(9):722-728. doi: 10.22454/FamMed.2022.167204
The first report of this worldwide project to assess the needs of the primary care community for how research is reported to help improve patient care and population health:
Phillips WR, Sturgiss E, Hunik, L, Glasziou P, olde Hartman T, Orkin A, Reeve J, Russell G, van Weel C. Improving the reporting of primary care research: An international survey of researchers. J Am Board Fam Med 2021. 34(1):12-21. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2021.01.200266
GPs are not FPs and the distinction is important for patient care, research, reporting and health policy. Read the new research that documents the important differences.
Researchers, reviewers, editors and journalists need to stop reporting these two groups of physicians as an aggregate “FP/GP” group. Blurring these distinctions obscures important differences between the groups.
This recent study documents how big a problem we have with this sloppy reporting.
Diep AM, Thoppe HS, Yang A, Agnani AS, Phillips WR. Accuracy of reporting primary care specialty status in medical research. Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine November 2019, 32(6): 941-943. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2019.06.190141
CONCLUSIONS. In key medical journals, most studies lump together GPs and FPs, masking differences between these distinct groups of physicians. Most research reports fail to explain how they classify PC clinicians. Research reports need to improve accuracy in studies of FPs and primary care in the US.