Family physicians have greater ambiguity tolerance in the clinical context: A nationwide cross-sectional study

IF 1.8 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Hirohisa Fujikawa MD, PhD, Takuya Aoki MD, PhD, MMA, Takayuki Ando MD, MPH, Junji Haruta MD, PhD
{"title":"Family physicians have greater ambiguity tolerance in the clinical context: A nationwide cross-sectional study","authors":"Hirohisa Fujikawa MD, PhD,&nbsp;Takuya Aoki MD, PhD, MMA,&nbsp;Takayuki Ando MD, MPH,&nbsp;Junji Haruta MD, PhD","doi":"10.1002/jgf2.747","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Ambiguity tolerance in the clinical context is increasingly recognized as essential for physicians to work as professionals. However, the relationship between specialty and ambiguity tolerance in the clinical context has been understudied. Here, we investigated the association between specialty and ambiguity tolerance in the clinical context, focusing on differences between family physicians (FPs) and non-FPs.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We performed a nationwide cross-sectional study in Japan. We asked FPs from 14 family medicine residency programs across Japan and non-FPs from monitors of an internet survey company in Japan to participate in the study. We assessed their tolerance for ambiguity using the Japanese version of the Tolerance for Ambiguity in Medical Students and Doctors (J-TAMSAD) scale.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>In total, 388 physicians (178 FPs and 210 non-FPs) completed our anonymous online survey and were included in the analysis. After adjustment for possible confounders (gender and postgraduate years), FPs had higher J-TAMSAD scale scores than internists/pediatricians, surgeons, and physicians with other specialties, meaning that FPs had greater ambiguity tolerance.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>This study reveals that FPs had greater tolerance for ambiguity in the clinical context than non-FPs. Our findings suggest that there may be a need to increase non-FP's tolerance for ambiguity specific to the clinical context through educational interventions, since ambiguity is inherent and growing in medicine today. FPs and non-FPs should work together to complement each other's strengths, rather than simply improving the training of non-FPs.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51861,"journal":{"name":"Journal of General and Family Medicine","volume":"26 2","pages":"128-134"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jgf2.747","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of General and Family Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jgf2.747","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Ambiguity tolerance in the clinical context is increasingly recognized as essential for physicians to work as professionals. However, the relationship between specialty and ambiguity tolerance in the clinical context has been understudied. Here, we investigated the association between specialty and ambiguity tolerance in the clinical context, focusing on differences between family physicians (FPs) and non-FPs.

Methods

We performed a nationwide cross-sectional study in Japan. We asked FPs from 14 family medicine residency programs across Japan and non-FPs from monitors of an internet survey company in Japan to participate in the study. We assessed their tolerance for ambiguity using the Japanese version of the Tolerance for Ambiguity in Medical Students and Doctors (J-TAMSAD) scale.

Results

In total, 388 physicians (178 FPs and 210 non-FPs) completed our anonymous online survey and were included in the analysis. After adjustment for possible confounders (gender and postgraduate years), FPs had higher J-TAMSAD scale scores than internists/pediatricians, surgeons, and physicians with other specialties, meaning that FPs had greater ambiguity tolerance.

Conclusions

This study reveals that FPs had greater tolerance for ambiguity in the clinical context than non-FPs. Our findings suggest that there may be a need to increase non-FP's tolerance for ambiguity specific to the clinical context through educational interventions, since ambiguity is inherent and growing in medicine today. FPs and non-FPs should work together to complement each other's strengths, rather than simply improving the training of non-FPs.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of General and Family Medicine
Journal of General and Family Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
6.20%
发文量
79
审稿时长
48 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信