医生和麻醉师：记住这场争论背后的人

The BMJ Pub Date : 2025-07-30 DOI:10.1136/bmj.r1573

Jemma Scattergood, Lucy Westwood

{"title":"医生和麻醉师：记住这场争论背后的人","authors":"Jemma Scattergood, Lucy Westwood","doi":"10.1136/bmj.r1573","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We feel compelled to respond to Greenhalgh and McKee’s rapid systematic review of recent research on physician associates (PAs) and anaesthetic associates (AAs).1 The debate can be “toxic”1 and “venomous,”2 and the wellbeing of PAs and AAs themselves is being overlooked. As doctors who work with PAs in a UK undergraduate medical education department, …","PeriodicalId":22388,"journal":{"name":"The BMJ","volume":"717 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Physician and anaesthetic associates: remember the people behind the debate\",\"authors\":\"Jemma Scattergood, Lucy Westwood\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmj.r1573\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We feel compelled to respond to Greenhalgh and McKee’s rapid systematic review of recent research on physician associates (PAs) and anaesthetic associates (AAs).1 The debate can be “toxic”1 and “venomous,”2 and the wellbeing of PAs and AAs themselves is being overlooked. As doctors who work with PAs in a UK undergraduate medical education department, …\",\"PeriodicalId\":22388,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The BMJ\",\"volume\":\"717 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The BMJ\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.r1573\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The BMJ","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.r1573","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

我们觉得有必要对Greenhalgh和McKee对最近关于医师助理（PAs）和麻醉师助理（AAs）的研究进行快速系统的回顾这场辩论可能是“有毒的”和“有毒的”，而私人助理和助理助理本身的福祉却被忽视了。作为在英国本科医学教育部门与私人助理合作的医生，…

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Physician and anaesthetic associates: remember the people behind the debate

We feel compelled to respond to Greenhalgh and McKee’s rapid systematic review of recent research on physician associates (PAs) and anaesthetic associates (AAs).1 The debate can be “toxic”1 and “venomous,”2 and the wellbeing of PAs and AAs themselves is being overlooked. As doctors who work with PAs in a UK undergraduate medical education department, …

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

The BMJ

自引率

0.00%

发文量