General practitioner gender and use of diagnostic procedures: A French cross-sectional study in training practices
BMJ Open, ISSN: 2044-6055, Vol: 12, Issue: 5, Page: e054486
2022
- 3Citations
- 9Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations3
- Citation Indexes3
- Captures9
- Readers9
- Mentions1
- News Mentions1
- News1
Most Recent News
General practitioner gender and use of diagnostic procedures: a French cross-sectional study in training practices
Methods Study design This study is an ancillary analysis of the ECOGEN (Eléments de la COnsultation en médecine GENérale) study, an observational cross-sectional nationwide multicentre
Article Description
Objectives The acceleration in the number of female doctors has led to questions about differences in how men and women practice medicine. The aim of this study was to assess the influence of general practitioner (GP) gender on the use of the three main categories of diagnostic procedures-clinical examinations, laboratory tests and imaging investigations. Design Cross-sectional nationwide multicentre study. Setting French training general practices. Participants The patient sample included all the voluntary patients over a cumulative period of 5 days per office between November 2011 and April 2012. The GP sample included 85 males and 43 females. Methods 54 interns in general practice, observing their GP supervisors, collected data about the characteristics of GPs and consultations, as well as the health problems managed during the visit and the processes of care associated with them. Using hierarchical multilevel mixed-effect logistic regression models, we performed multivariable analyses to assess differences in each of the three main categories of diagnostic procedures, and two specific multivariable analyses for each category, distinguishing screening from diagnostic or follow-up procedures. We searched for interactions between GP gender and patient gender or type of health problem managed. Results This analysis of 45 582 health problems managed in 20 613 consultations showed that female GPs performed more clinical examinations than male GPs, both for screening (OR 1.75; 95% CI 1.19 to 2.58) and for diagnostic or follow-up purposes (OR 1.41; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.84). Female GPs also ordered laboratory tests for diagnostic or follow-up purposes more frequently (OR 1.21; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.43). Female GPs performed even more clinical examinations than male GPs to diagnose or follow-up injuries (OR 1.69; 95% CI 1.19 to 2.40). Conclusion Further research on the appropriateness of diagnostic procedures is required to determine to what extent these differences are related to underuse or overuse.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85130003476&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054486; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35523487; https://bmjopen.bmj.com/lookup/doi/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054486; https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054486; https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/12/5/e054486; https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/12/5/e054486.abstract; https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/bmjopen/12/5/e054486.full.pdf
BMJ
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know