DFG Network Clincial Trials in General Practice. The development of general practice as an academic discipline in Germany-an analysis of research output between 2000 and 2010

BMC Family Practice (Impact Factor: 1.67). 06/2012; 13(1):58. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2296-13-58
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Background
Governmental funding support is seen as a prerequisite for the growth of research in general practice. Several funding programs in the amount of € 13.2 Mio were introduced in Germany from 2002 to February 2012. We aim to provide an overview of publications reporting original data and systematic reviews from German academic family medicine published between 2000 and 2010.

Publications were identified by searching the database Scopus and screening publication lists of family medicine divisions or institutes. Papers had to report original primary research studies or systematic reviews; at least one of the authors had to be affiliated to a German academic family medicine division or institute.

794 articles were included. The number of publications increased steadily starting from 107 in the period from 2000 to 2003, to 273 from 2004 to 2007, and finally to 414 from 2008 to 2010. Less than 25% were published in English in the first period. This proportion increased to 60.6% from 2008 to 2010. Articles published in a journal without impact factor decreased from 59.8% to 31.9%. Nevertheless, even in the most recent period only 31.6% of all articles were published in a journal with an impact factor above 2. The median impact factor increased from 0 in the first period to 1.2 in the last.

The output of original research publications from academic research divisions and institutes for general practice in Germany greatly increased during the last decade. However, professionalism of German primary care research still needs to be developed.

10 Reads
  • Source
    • "All institutes have at least a small research activity, but only Zurich has enough resources resulting in a substantial amount of research projects and publications. Compared to Germany, where the development of academic primary care is slightly more advanced [34], the research output in Zurich is comparable to leading German institutes [37,38], even though a gap still exits compared to countries where academic primary care is much more developed (United Kingdom, The Netherlands) [39]. Furthermore the research output of the institute in Zurich is comparable to other medical specialties at the University of Zurich [40]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence that a strong primary care is a cornerstone of an efficient health care system. But Switzerland is facing a shortage of primary care physicians (PCPs). This pushed the Federal Council of Switzerland to introduce a multifaceted political programme to strengthen the position of primary care, including its academic role. The aim of this paper is to provide a comprehensive overview of the situation of academic primary care at the five Swiss universities by the end of year 2012. RESULTS: Although primary care teaching activities have a long tradition at the five Swiss universities with activities starting in the beginning of the 1980ies; the academic institutes of primary care were only established in recent years (2005 - 2009). Only one of them has an established chair. Human and financial resources vary substantially. At all universities a broad variety of courses and lectures are offered, including teaching in private primary care practices with 1331 PCPs involved. Regarding research, differences among the institutes are tremendous, mainly caused by entirely different human resources and skills. CONCLUSION: So far, the activities of the existing institutes at the Swiss Universities are mainly focused on teaching. However, for a complete academic institutionalization as well as an increased acceptance and attractiveness, more research activities are needed. In addition to an adequate basic funding of research positions, competitive research grants have to be created to establish a specialty-specific research culture.
    BMC Research Notes 05/2014; 7(1):308. DOI:10.1186/1756-0500-7-308
  • Source
    • "Research papers published by German general practice researchers were sought in Scopus ( and by hand searching publication lists of general practice departments, details are given in [25]. Literature referring to prerequisites and circumstances specific to conducting clinical trials studies in primary care settings was retrieved in PubMed (2000 to 2012) searching for the MeSH term ‘Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic’ and keywords ‘primary care/general practice/family practice’ as well as ‘feasibility’, ‘recruitment’, and ‘design’. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background In Germany, clinical trials and comparative effectiveness studies in primary care are still very rare, while their usefulness has been recognised in many other countries. A network of researchers from German academic general practice has explored the reasons for this discrepancy. Methods Based on a comprehensive literature review and expert group discussions, problem analyses as well as structural and procedural prerequisites for a better implementation of clinical trials in German primary care are presented. Results In Germany, basic biomedical science and technology is more reputed than clinical or health services research. Clinical trials are funded by industry or a single national programme, which is highly competitive, specialist-dominated, exclusive of pilot studies, and usually favours innovation rather than comparative effectiveness studies. Academic general practice is still not fully implemented, and existing departments are small. Most general practitioners (GPs) work in a market-based, competitive setting of small private practices, with a high case load. They have no protected time or funding for research, and mostly no research training or experience. Good Clinical Practice (GCP) training is compulsory for participation in clinical trials. The group defined three work packages to be addressed regarding clinical trials in German general practice: (1) problem analysis, and definition of (2) structural prerequisites and (3) procedural prerequisites. Structural prerequisites comprise specific support facilities for general practice-based research networks that could provide practices with a point of contact. Procedural prerequisites consist, for example, of a summary of specific relevant key measures, for example on a web platform. The platform should contain standard operating procedures (SOPs), templates, checklists and other supporting materials for researchers. Conclusion All in all, our problem analyses revealed that a substantial number of barriers contribute to the low implementation of clinical research in German general practice. Some issues are deeply rooted in Germany’s market-based healthcare and academic systems and traditions. However, new developments may facilitate change: recent developments in the German research landscape are encouraging.
    Trials 11/2012; 13(1):205. DOI:10.1186/1745-6215-13-205 · 1.73 Impact Factor
  • Source
    SAÚDE, DESENVOLVIMENTO, CIÊNCIA, TECNOLOGIA E INOVAÇÃO, 1 edited by ANA LUIZA d’ÁVILA VIANA, NELSON IBAÑEZ, AYLENE BOUSQUAT, 01/2012: pages 436-459; Hucitec Editora., ISBN: 978-85-64806-54-2
Show more

Preview (2 Sources)

10 Reads
Available from