{"title":"家庭医学医生参与国家政策的快照:来自2023年CERA调查的结果。","authors":"Amogh Shukla, Amy Clithero-Eridon, Cameron Crandall, David Chartash, Reiana Mahan, Danielle Albright","doi":"10.3122/jabfm.2024.240414R1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Health care professionals are in a unique position to enact health-related social change. Medicine is subject to regulation at the organizational, local, state, and national levels. Federal laws apply to physicians throughout the US; as such, federal policy affects physician practice intentions similarly. However, there is little research on state-level engagement in the political process and none on the participation by family medicine physicians.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This article examines the nature of physician civic engagement at the state level. Data were gathered and analyzed as part of the 2023 Council of Academic Family Medicine's (CAFM) Educational Research Alliance (CERA) survey of Family Medicine educators and practicing physicians. We used nonparametric statistics (Kruskal-Wallis tests) to analyze ordinal variables. Categorical variables were analyzed using χ<sup>2</sup> tests. We used multivariable ordinal logistic regression to assess the joint effects of participant characteristics on study outcomes and to adjust for potential confounding.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The policy question section of the survey received 709 responses, a response rate of 21%. Our results show a lack of civic engagement, including less than a third voting in state elections and only 4% making financial contributions to political campaigns. Seventeen percent of respondents reported considering relocating due to state health policies. For all questions, we observed variations by geographical region and gender.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings provide a timely analysis of family medicine physician participation in the political process, the effect of specific health policies, and how these policies are comparatively received among family medicine physicians in the United States.</p>","PeriodicalId":50018,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"610-618"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Snapshot of Family Medicine Physician Engagement with State Policy: Findings from the 2023 CERA Survey.\",\"authors\":\"Amogh Shukla, Amy Clithero-Eridon, Cameron Crandall, David Chartash, Reiana Mahan, Danielle Albright\",\"doi\":\"10.3122/jabfm.2024.240414R1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Health care professionals are in a unique position to enact health-related social change. Medicine is subject to regulation at the organizational, local, state, and national levels. Federal laws apply to physicians throughout the US; as such, federal policy affects physician practice intentions similarly. However, there is little research on state-level engagement in the political process and none on the participation by family medicine physicians.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This article examines the nature of physician civic engagement at the state level. Data were gathered and analyzed as part of the 2023 Council of Academic Family Medicine's (CAFM) Educational Research Alliance (CERA) survey of Family Medicine educators and practicing physicians. We used nonparametric statistics (Kruskal-Wallis tests) to analyze ordinal variables. Categorical variables were analyzed using χ<sup>2</sup> tests. We used multivariable ordinal logistic regression to assess the joint effects of participant characteristics on study outcomes and to adjust for potential confounding.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The policy question section of the survey received 709 responses, a response rate of 21%. Our results show a lack of civic engagement, including less than a third voting in state elections and only 4% making financial contributions to political campaigns. Seventeen percent of respondents reported considering relocating due to state health policies. For all questions, we observed variations by geographical region and gender.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings provide a timely analysis of family medicine physician participation in the political process, the effect of specific health policies, and how these policies are comparatively received among family medicine physicians in the United States.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50018,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"610-618\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2024.240414R1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2024.240414R1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
A Snapshot of Family Medicine Physician Engagement with State Policy: Findings from the 2023 CERA Survey.
Background: Health care professionals are in a unique position to enact health-related social change. Medicine is subject to regulation at the organizational, local, state, and national levels. Federal laws apply to physicians throughout the US; as such, federal policy affects physician practice intentions similarly. However, there is little research on state-level engagement in the political process and none on the participation by family medicine physicians.
Methods: This article examines the nature of physician civic engagement at the state level. Data were gathered and analyzed as part of the 2023 Council of Academic Family Medicine's (CAFM) Educational Research Alliance (CERA) survey of Family Medicine educators and practicing physicians. We used nonparametric statistics (Kruskal-Wallis tests) to analyze ordinal variables. Categorical variables were analyzed using χ2 tests. We used multivariable ordinal logistic regression to assess the joint effects of participant characteristics on study outcomes and to adjust for potential confounding.
Results: The policy question section of the survey received 709 responses, a response rate of 21%. Our results show a lack of civic engagement, including less than a third voting in state elections and only 4% making financial contributions to political campaigns. Seventeen percent of respondents reported considering relocating due to state health policies. For all questions, we observed variations by geographical region and gender.
Conclusions: Our findings provide a timely analysis of family medicine physician participation in the political process, the effect of specific health policies, and how these policies are comparatively received among family medicine physicians in the United States.
期刊介绍:
Published since 1988, the Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine ( JABFM ) is the official peer-reviewed journal of the American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM). Believing that the public and scientific communities are best served by open access to information, JABFM makes its articles available free of charge and without registration at www.jabfm.org. JABFM is indexed by Medline, Index Medicus, and other services.