Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Factors influencing focused practice: A qualitative study of resident and early-career family physician practice choices

View ORCID ProfileMonisha Kabir, View ORCID ProfileEllen Randall, Goldis Mitra, View ORCID ProfileM. Ruth Lavergne, Ian Scott, View ORCID ProfileDavid Snadden, Lori Jones, Laurie J. Goldsmith, View ORCID ProfileEmily G. Marshall, View ORCID ProfileAgnes Grudniewicz
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.06.24.21259486
Monisha Kabir
1Telfer School of Management, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON
2Division of Palliative Care, Bruyère, Research Institute, Ottawa, ON
HBSc, MSc
Roles: (Candidate)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Monisha Kabir
Ellen Randall
3School of Population and Public, Health, University of British, Columbia
MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ellen Randall
Goldis Mitra
4Department of Family Practice, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
M. Ruth Lavergne
5Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University
MSc, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for M. Ruth Lavergne
Ian Scott
6Department of Family Practice and the Centre for Heath Education, Scholarship, Faculty of Medicine, the University of British Columbia
BSc, MSc, MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David Snadden
7Department of Family Practice, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, BC
8Northern Medical Program, Prince George, BC
MBChB, MClSc, MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for David Snadden
Lori Jones
9Department of History, University of Ottawa, Ottawa ON
10Department of History, Carleton University, Ottawa ON
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Laurie J. Goldsmith
11GoldQual Consulting, Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon, Fraser University
MSc, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Emily G. Marshall
12Department of Family Medicine, Primary Care Research Unit, Dalhousie University
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Emily G. Marshall
Agnes Grudniewicz
1Telfer School of Management, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Agnes Grudniewicz
  • For correspondence: grudniewicz{at}telfer.uottawa.ca
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background Although focused practice within family medicine may be increasing globally, there is limited research on the factors contributing to decisions to focus practice. We aimed to examine the factors influencing resident and early-career family physician choices of focused practice across three Canadian provinces.

Methods We analyzed a subset of qualitative interview data from a study across British Columbia, Ontario, and Nova Scotia. A total of 22 resident family physicians and 38 early-career family physicians in their first 10 years of practice who intend to or currently practice in a focused area were included in our analysis. We compared participant types, provinces, and the degree of focused practice while identifying themes related to factors influencing the pursuit of focused practice.

Results We identified three key themes of factors contributing to choices of focused practice: self-preservation within the current health care system, support from colleagues, and experiences in medical school and/or residency. Minor themes included alignment of practice with skills, personal values, or ability to derive professional satisfaction; personal lived experiences; and having many attractive opportunities for focused practice.

Interpretation Both groups of participants unanimously viewed focused practice as a way to circumvent the burnout or exhaustion they associated with comprehensive practice in the current structure of the health care. This finding, in addition to other influential factors, was consistent across the three provinces. More research is needed to understand the implications of resident and early-career family physician choices of focused practice within the physician workforce.

Introduction

In recent decades, there has been a global decline in offering a comprehensive scope of practice in family medicine,[1-6] and a concurrent trend towards focused practice,[7-12] wherein one or more specific clinical areas form a major part-time or full-time component of practice.[13] Previous research suggests that this trend is in part due to perceptions that focused practice offers a desirable intellectual challenge[8] and better remuneration.[14] Other studies suggest that the exodus from comprehensive family medicine practice can be attributed to both the breadth and the overwhelming nature of its scope,[7, 12] and undesirable post-training working environments.[3] These studies have not provided an in-depth examination of the factors influencing the pursuit of focused practice in family medicine.

The objective of this study was to examine the factors contributing to choices of focused practice in three Canadian provinces. In Canada, medical school is graduate entry, lasts three to four years, and for family practitioners, is followed by two years as a resident family physician (FP) before certification as an independent family practitioner. We present findings from both resident FPs and independent family practitioners in their first decade of practice, henceforth “early-career FPs”, to address our research question.

Methods

Study design and population

We report on a subset of the qualitative interview data collected through a larger mixed methods study examining factors contributing to practice intentions and choices among resident and early-career FPs across British Columbia, Ontario, and Nova Scotia.[15]

We recruited resident and early-career FPs for the qualitative arm of this larger mixed methods study through family medicine residency programs, social media, research conferences, and selected provincial medical associations.

Interested participants completed an online screening survey that captured demographic information and practice characteristics (see Appendix 1). We used purposeful sampling to maximize variation across self-identified gender, marital status, dependents, training location, years of training, years in practice, scope of practice, and practice models in each province. Selected individuals were then invited to participate in a 60-minute interview. We provided participants with study information and an honorarium.

We interviewed 31 of 32 resident FPs and 63 of 69 early-career FPs who had been invited to participate in the larger mixed methods study. Reasons for nonparticipation included scheduling conflicts (n=2), no response (n=4), or withdrawal with no reason provided (n=1). The study received ethics approval in all three provinces.

Context for this paper

The sample used in this paper consists of 22 resident FPs and 38 early-career FPs who: i) self-identified in the screening survey as intending to practice or currently practicing within a focused area, and/or ii) described focused practice elements in their overall practice during the interview. We considered resident and early-career FPs to have a focused practice, in whole or in part, if a component of their intended or current practice was narrowed or specialized in scope (e.g., addictions medicine, emergency medicine) and they did not intend to or currently deliver any routine comprehensive family medicine care to patients in that part of their practice. We considered resident and early-career FPs to be engaging in comprehensive family medicine practice when they described providing clinic-based, first-contact, longitudinal, comprehensive, and coordinated services to a defined group of patients to address the majority of their health care needs.[16, 17] Our definition of comprehensive family medicine practice included providing comprehensive care for a particular population (e.g., refugees) or comprehensive care omitting obstetrics/prenatal care.

Data collection

One research analyst (ER, LJ, MM) per province conducted one-on-one, semi-structured, in-depth interviews. Each research analyst was trained in qualitative interviewing. Telephone interviews were conducted using a semi-structured interview guide specific to each subgroup (see Appendix 2). Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Research analysts recorded their reflections and interview summaries after each interview. Participant recruitment occurred iteratively until no new themes were identified in interviews.

Data analysis

We used iterative, inductive thematic analysis.[18] For the qualitative arm of the larger mixed methods study, three research analysts (ER, LJ, MM) with experience in qualitative analysis generated initial resident and early-career FP codebooks through inductive coding of one resident and one early-career FP interview.[19] Codebooks were then refined through application to a subset of transcripts with guidance from the senior author (AG). The research analysts used the final codebooks to code transcripts from their respective provinces in NVivo 12[20]. Codebooks were iteratively amended to incorporate emerging codes and ensure consistency between the resident and early-career FP codebooks. The research analysts also coded one interview from another province to ensure reliability.

Data analysis for this paper involved the first author (MK) reviewing interview excerpts coded as influential factors for practice choices and aggregating them into potential overarching themes, based on the identification of patterns between and across the transcripts. We conducted comparative analysis[21] to compare thematic patterns identified from the early-career FP transcripts with the resident FP dataset. If new themes were identified from the resident FP transcripts, we used an iterative approach to find corresponding themes in the early-career FP transcripts. We also compared themes across provinces.

We used accepted strategies for validating qualitative research.[22] The findings were: i) triangulated across a large sample size of participants with diverse experiences from three provinces and two types of participant groups;[23] and ii) presented to FP members of the research team (DS, IS, GM), who were not involved in the analysis process for this paper, to confirm data interpretation.

Results

Description of interview participants’ focused practice intentions or choices

The 22 resident and 38 early-career FPs reported a variety of intended or current clinical areas of practice, with most participants reporting a combination of focused area(s) and/or some form of comprehensive practice and focused practice. We present demographic and practice characteristics (Table 1 and 2) to reflect the range of resident and early-career FPs included in our analysis.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 1.

Planned practice characteristics of resident FP participants choosing to focus their practice (N=22).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 2.

Practice characteristics of early-career FP participants with focused practices (N=38).

Among the resident FPs who intended to focus their practices, 21 (95%) anticipated practicing some form of comprehensive family medicine with focused practice. One resident FP envisioned solely working in focused practice. Among early-career FPs, 21 (55%) devoted more than half or all their time to a focused area and 30 (79%) offered some form of comprehensive family medicine. The most commonly reported areas of focused areas of practice in both groups were emergency and hospitalist medicine. Focused practice choices occurred on a continuum, ranging from the provision of all services under the umbrella of a defined area (e.g., dermatology) to a specific procedure within a particular area (e.g., only Botox injections).

Key factors contributing to intentions or choices of focused practice

We identified three key and three minor themes of influential factors that helped explain participants’ decisions to pursue focused practice. Key themes were prominent across both resident and early-career FP datasets, while minor themes were less salient in the data. Themes are described in detail in Table 3 with illustrative quotations.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3.

Themes of influential factors for focused practice

Self-preservation within the current structure of the health care system

Both participant groups described issues within the health care system that influenced their choices of focused practice, specifically with regards to remuneration and workload. Certain physician remuneration models, such as fee-for-service, deterred participants from practicing comprehensive family medicine. Fee-for-service was seen as inadequately compensating for the long hours, workload, and overhead costs associated with longitudinal care for increasingly complex patients. In contrast, focused practice was seen as more attractive and sustainable due to better compensation and fewer administrative costs.

The early-career FPs in our study described policies governing primary care delivery in all three provinces as contributing to heavy workloads and concerns about burnout. Similarly, resident FPs relayed observations of FP mentors being overworked, inadequately remunerated, and having difficulty securing time off in comprehensive family medicine practice. In contrast, both participant groups felt that focused practice offered better remuneration and flexibility to choose hours worked, allowing more time for family commitments, hobbies, or parental leave. Resident and early-career FPs saw parental leave as incompatible with comprehensive family medicine practice due to challenges securing locum coverage, perceived resentment from patients for time off, and interruptions in patient continuity of care.

Further, early-career FPs with focused practices described feeling pressured during their training to work in what they considered an antiquated FP role. They shared that instructors put emphasis on a paradigm of comprehensive family medicine practice that involved working around the clock to serve patients and that this was the best way to practice. Early-career FP participants perceived these traditional comprehensive FP roles as unachievable for current and future levels of patient complexity and need, and detrimental to their well-being and family. Resident and early-career FPs alike expressed an unwillingness to sacrifice work-life balance, believing that policy reform was necessary for them to consider a broader scope of practice. Both participant groups were unanimously dissatisfied with provincial government policies, and considered their governments to be unresponsive to their needs and undervaluing FPs.

Access to a support system

Resident and early-career FPs felt focused practice offered greater access to a support system compared to comprehensive family medicine practice. Both participant groups viewed call groups and team-based care environments within focused practice areas (e.g., hospitalist medicine) as support systems that improved quality of care, facilitated knowledge sharing, and decreased isolation. Such systems facilitated self-preservation in the current health care system. Early-career FPs also described their peers as role models who demonstrated the feasibility of incorporating focused areas into their overall practices.

Training experiences

Both participant groups reported training experiences that increased their comfort with focused areas of practice and created recognition workload in comprehensive family medicine was not an ideal match for their desired lifestyle. This belief was reinforced by resident and early-career FP perceptions that their mentors were exhausted in comprehensive family medicine practice environments.

Minor themes for influential factors for focused practice

Resident and early-career FPs described feeling attracted to a particular focused area (e.g., hospitalist medicine) because it aligned with their skills/values or helped them maintain specific competencies. Both participant groups indicated that a focused practice brought with it a sense of professional satisfaction by filling a perceived gap in care, increasing variety in their work, or being intellectually stimulated.

Both participant groups also described personal lived experiences that sparked their interest in particular focused practice areas. For example, experiences with family members, friends, or community members with mental health struggles or addictions, along with prior volunteer experiences, contributed to interest in focused practices in mental health and addictions.

Resident FPs described being attracted to focusing their practice due to available opportunities, community needs, and limited specialist availability. Similarly, early-career FPs reported being inclined to incorporate focused areas into their practices due to a multitude of job opportunities in focused practice.

Comparison between provinces

Our results were similar across the provinces studied. Resident and early-career FPs in British Columbia and Nova Scotia described similar concerns about inadequate compensation for the workload and responsibility involved in comprehensive family medicine practice. Specifically, early-career FPs in these provinces desired fee-for-service fee schedules that aligned with other provinces or alternative payment models. In Ontario, resident and early-career FPs expressed dissatisfaction with the province’s numerous payment models, describing loss of control over earnings in comprehensive family medicine practice, uncertainty, and distrust due to a fluctuating policy landscape (e.g., fee cuts, role restrictions).

Interpretation

The resident and early-career FPs with focused practices found focused practice attractive for numerous reasons, including: more manageable workloads, better remuneration, and improved work-life balance; familiarity from prior exposure during training; and the presence of a supportive team environment. Less common reasons for opting for focused practice included alignment with participants’ skills, values, or an ability to feel professional satisfaction; personal lived experience; and having a multitude of opportunities to practice. Resident and early-career FPs described focused practice as a way to circumvent burnout or exhaustion, which they considered to be an untenable component of comprehensive family medicine practice in the current health care system. Discontent with provincial policies and the lack of government responsiveness to their concerns was apparent across all provinces and practice types.

Explanation of the findings

Previous work has identified newly graduating resident FPs as more likely to intend to provide a broad scope of practice compared to FPs in current practice.[3] Though our study was not designed for statistical comparisons, we also found that resident FPs were more likely to report intending to practice comprehensive family medicine than early-career FPs. The post-training working environment and lack of support for providing a broad scope of services have been suggested as possible driving forces for this finding.[3] Other studies have described comprehensive family medicine practice as too broad, overwhelming, involving a high degree of responsibility, allowing for minimal work-life balance,[7, 8] and providing insufficient financial incentives.[9] Factors reported to support the choice of focused practice include superior financial incentives,[14] opportunities for intellectual stimulation,[7, 8] reduced stress from a lower workload,[7] and prior training exposures.[24] Our study confirms these findings. Canadian FPs have reported feeling unprepared to deliver comprehensive care.[12, 25] We did not find this in our study. Instead, we found system-level barriers, linked to government policy, influencing focused practice choices.

Our study confirms influential factors for focused practice previously identified in the literature, and describes additional elements that, to our knowledge, have not been described before. Moreover, we found similar factors contributing to choices of focused practice for both resident and early-career FPs, demonstrating that these factors are consistent prior to and during independent practice.

Future directions

There is contention about the benefits and harms of increasing focused practice within family medicine.[26] The impact of rising numbers of FPs practicing in focused areas on the supply of FPs providing comprehensive care is still unknown and requires more research. Further work is also needed to identify reforms that may encourage FPs to offer a comprehensive scope of family medicine while supporting their personal and professional well-being.

Limitations

Data collection for this study occurred prior to the onset of COVID-19 and therefore does not necessarily reflect the current environment. This study only includes individuals who responded to requests to participate, which may not reflect all types of resident and early-career FPs. We did not ask participants specific questions about sex/gender, geography, and training location, focusing instead on open-ended questions. We may have developed a richer description by probing these additional areas.

Conclusions

Numerous elements, including system-level issues, shape resident and early-career FP choices to narrow the scope of their practices. Our work found similar influential factors shaping practice choices among both resident and early-career FPs in three Canadian provinces. Further work is needed to understand the potential impact of focused practice on the delivery of health care services in Canada, and associated policy implications.

Data Availability

Due to the identifiable nature of raw data (interview transcripts), they are not publicly available. Requests for additional information about study data or results can be forwarded to the corresponding author (AG).

Ethical approval

This study was approved by the Simon Fraser University (#H18-03291), University of Ottawa (#S-05-18-776), and Nova Scotia Health Authority research ethics boards (#1023561).

Appendices

Appendix 1. Screening survey.

Appendix 2. Interview guide for resident and early-career family physicians.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests

  • No competing interests to declare

  • No competing interests to declare

  • No competing interests

  • No competing interests to declare

  • I am a committee chair at the College of Family Physicians of Canada

  • No competing interests

  • No competing interests to declare

  • No competing interests to declare

  • No competing interests to declare

  • No competing interests to declare

  • Funding statement: This project was funded by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research grant (#155965).

References

  1. 1.↵
    Chan BTB. The declining comprehensiveness of primary care. CMAJ. 2002;166(4):429–34.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.
    Collier R. The changing face of family medicine. CMAJ. 2011;183(18):E1287–E8.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    Coutinho AJ, Cochrane A, Stelter K, Phillips RL, Peterson LE. Comparison of intended scope of practice for family medicine residents with reported scope of practice among practicing family physicians. JAMA. 2015;314(22):2364.
    OpenUrl
  4. 4.
    Freeman TR, Boisvert L, Wong E, Wetmore S, Maddocks H. Comprehensive practice: Normative definition across 3 generations of alumni from a single family practice program, 1985 to 2012. Can Fam Physician. 2018;64(10):750–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.
    Reitz R, Horst K, Davenport M, Klemmetsen S, Clark M. Factors Influencing Family Physician Scope of Practice: A Grounded Theory Study. Fam Med. 2018;50(4):269–74.
    OpenUrl
  6. 6.↵
    Schultz SE, Glazier RH. Identification of physicians providing comprehensive primary care in Ontario: a retrospective analysis using linked administrative data. CMAJ Open. 2017;5(4):E856–E63.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    Beaulieu M-D, Rioux M, Rocher G, Samson L, Boucher L. Family practice: Professional identity in transition. A case study of family medicine in Canada. Soc Sci Med. 2008;67(7):1153–63.
    OpenUrl
  8. 8.↵
    Beaulieu MD, Dory V, Pestiaux D, Pouchain D, Rioux M, Rocher G, et al. What does it mean to be a family physician?: Exploratory study with family medicine residents from 3 countries. Can Fam Physician. 2009;55(8):e14–20.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. 9.↵
    Calnan M. Variations in the range of services provided by general practitioners. Fam Pract. 1988;5(2):94–104.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.
    Dhillon P. Shifting into third gear: current options and controversies in third-year postgraduate family medicine programs in Canada. Can Fam Physician. 2013;59(9):e406–12.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.
    Lerner J. Wanting family medicine without primary care. Can Fam Physician. 2018;64(2):155–6.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    Vogel L. Are enhanced skills programs undermining family medicine? CMAJ. 2019;191(2):E57–E8.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  13. 13.↵
    Grierson L, Vanstone M, Alice I. Understanding the Impact of the CFPC certificates of Added Competence [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2021 April 28]. Available from: https://www.cfpc.ca/CFPC/media/PDF/2020-04-CAC-Impact-Study-Report.pdf.
  14. 14.↵
    Glazer J. Specialization in family medicine education: abandoning our generalist roots. Fam Pract Manag. 2007;14(2):13–5.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    Lavergne MR, Goldsmith LJ, Grudniewicz A, Rudoler D, Marshall EG, Ahuja M, et al. Practice patterns among early-career primary care (ECPC) physicians and workforce planning implications: protocol for a mixed methods study. BMJ Open. 2019;9(9):e030477.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. 16.↵
    Starfield B. Primary Care: Concept, Evaluation, and Policy. New York: Oxford University Press; 1992.
  17. 17.↵
    Institute of Medicine. Primary care: America’s health in a new era. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press; 1996.
  18. 18.↵
    Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  19. 19.↵
    Aronson J. A pragmatic view of thematic analysis. The Qualitative Report. 1993;2(1):1–3.
    OpenUrl
  20. 20.↵
    QSR International Pty Ltd. NVivo 12 [Software]. 2018 [cited 2021 March 19]. Available from: https://www.qsrinternational.com/nvivo-qualitative-data-analysis-software/home.
  21. 21.↵
    Guest G, MacQueen K, Namey E. Comparing Thematic Data. 2012. In: Applied Thematic Analysis [Internet]. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, Inc.; [161-86]. Available from: https://methods.sagepub.com/book/applied-thematic-analysis.
  22. 22.↵
    Creswell J, Poth C. Standards of validation and evaluation. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2018. p. 253–86.
  23. 23.↵
    Carter N, Bryant-Lukosius D, DiCenso A, Blythe J, Neville AJ. The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2014;41(5):545.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    Coutinho AJ, Levin Z, Petterson S, Phillips RL, Peterson LE. Residency program characteristics and individual physician practice characteristics associated with family physician scope of practice. Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges. 2019;94(10):1561–6.
    OpenUrl
  25. 25.↵
    Osborn R, Moulds D, Schneider EC, Doty MM, Squires D, Sarnak DO. Primary care physicians in ten countries report challenges caring for patients with complex health needs. Health Aff. 2015;34(12):2104–12.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  26. 26.↵
    Collier R. A comprehensive view of focused practices. CMAJ. 2011;183(18):E1289–90.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted June 27, 2021.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Factors influencing focused practice: A qualitative study of resident and early-career family physician practice choices
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Factors influencing focused practice: A qualitative study of resident and early-career family physician practice choices
Monisha Kabir, Ellen Randall, Goldis Mitra, M. Ruth Lavergne, Ian Scott, David Snadden, Lori Jones, Laurie J. Goldsmith, Emily G. Marshall, Agnes Grudniewicz
medRxiv 2021.06.24.21259486; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.06.24.21259486
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Factors influencing focused practice: A qualitative study of resident and early-career family physician practice choices
Monisha Kabir, Ellen Randall, Goldis Mitra, M. Ruth Lavergne, Ian Scott, David Snadden, Lori Jones, Laurie J. Goldsmith, Emily G. Marshall, Agnes Grudniewicz
medRxiv 2021.06.24.21259486; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.06.24.21259486

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Primary Care Research
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (427)
  • Allergy and Immunology (753)
  • Anesthesia (220)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (3284)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (362)
  • Dermatology (276)
  • Emergency Medicine (478)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (1168)
  • Epidemiology (13346)
  • Forensic Medicine (19)
  • Gastroenterology (898)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (5138)
  • Geriatric Medicine (480)
  • Health Economics (781)
  • Health Informatics (3260)
  • Health Policy (1140)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (1189)
  • Hematology (428)
  • HIV/AIDS (1015)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (14617)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (912)
  • Medical Education (476)
  • Medical Ethics (126)
  • Nephrology (522)
  • Neurology (4909)
  • Nursing (262)
  • Nutrition (725)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (880)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (795)
  • Oncology (2517)
  • Ophthalmology (722)
  • Orthopedics (280)
  • Otolaryngology (347)
  • Pain Medicine (323)
  • Palliative Medicine (90)
  • Pathology (542)
  • Pediatrics (1299)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (549)
  • Primary Care Research (555)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (4198)
  • Public and Global Health (7489)
  • Radiology and Imaging (1703)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (1010)
  • Respiratory Medicine (979)
  • Rheumatology (479)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (496)
  • Sports Medicine (424)
  • Surgery (547)
  • Toxicology (72)
  • Transplantation (235)
  • Urology (203)