Family medicine · 2025
Perceived Value of Family Physicians Inquiries Network Membership: A Qualitative Study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rodríguez José E, Wheat Santina J G, Blomgren Anamika, Gerdes Lushawna, Hufendiek Adalayna, Cortés López Edén
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Leaders in academic family medicine founded the Family Physicians Inquiries Network (FPIN) 27 years ago to facilitate scholarship and research in family medicine residency programs. This study evaluates the perceived value of FPIN membership (defined as what members feel FPIN membership adds to their program) by analyzing responses to open-ended questions in the annual membership survey from 2018 to 2023.
METHODS: The survey asked questions such as, "Would you recommend FPIN to a friend? Why or why not?" and "Do you believe that the care you are providing patients in your community is better as a result of your involvement with FPIN?" Researchers applied thematic analysis to code and categorize responses into themes that capture a meta-summary of ideas.
RESULTS: Over the 5-year study period, individuals in 109 of the 169 programs (66% of programs) responded to the survey, including 289 responses to open-ended questions. We were unable to calculate an accurate response rate, but our best estimate is about 2%, making the quantitative portion less useful. Qualitative analysis revealed themes of strengths, impact, and areas for improvement. Strengths subthemes included publishing clinically useful summaries, assisting novice writers, welcoming supportive environment, and publishing guidance and feasibility. Impact subthemes included journal impact and objective, and broader visibility. Areas for improvement subthemes included FPIN financial constraints, help desk answers publishing frustrations, and website difficulties.
CONCLUSIONS: FPIN members responded positively and valued participating in FPIN.
METHODS: The survey asked questions such as, "Would you recommend FPIN to a friend? Why or why not?" and "Do you believe that the care you are providing patients in your community is better as a result of your involvement with FPIN?" Researchers applied thematic analysis to code and categorize responses into themes that capture a meta-summary of ideas.
RESULTS: Over the 5-year study period, individuals in 109 of the 169 programs (66% of programs) responded to the survey, including 289 responses to open-ended questions. We were unable to calculate an accurate response rate, but our best estimate is about 2%, making the quantitative portion less useful. Qualitative analysis revealed themes of strengths, impact, and areas for improvement. Strengths subthemes included publishing clinically useful summaries, assisting novice writers, welcoming supportive environment, and publishing guidance and feasibility. Impact subthemes included journal impact and objective, and broader visibility. Areas for improvement subthemes included FPIN financial constraints, help desk answers publishing frustrations, and website difficulties.
CONCLUSIONS: FPIN members responded positively and valued participating in FPIN.