PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 8762745

Gender differences in general practitioners at work.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The proportion of female general practitioners is steadily increasing. AIM: To compare male and female general practitioners with respect to their job satisfaction and professional commitments within and outside their practices. METHOD: A questionnaire was sent to all 896 general practitioner principals with patients in Staffordshire in 1994. The main elements were: job satisfaction (on a five-point scale) from eight possible sources; whether personal responsibility was taken for 12 different practice tasks; and professional commitments outside the practice. RESULTS: A total of 620 (69%) general practitioners responded. Female doctors derived more satisfaction than male doctors from relationships with patients (P = 0.002). Female doctors were more likely to be working in training practices, and were likely to be on-call less and to work fewer sessions. Male general practitioners were more likely to take lead responsibility for practice computers, minor surgery, meeting external visitors and finance, whereas female practitioners were more likely to be responsible for looking after women patients' health. CONCLUSION: Considerable differences were found between male and female general practitioners. These differences are likely to have an increasing impact as the percentage of female general practitioners continues to rise.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

R Chambers, I Campbell. 1996. Gender differences in general practitioners at work.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8762745/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

A comparison of learning outcomes and attitudes in student- versus faculty-led problem-based learning: an experimental study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare learning outcomes and perceptions of facilitator behaviours and small-group process in problem-based learning (PBL) groups led by students and those led by faculty. DESIGN: A prospective, Latin-square cross-over design was employed. Second-year medical students participated in 11 PBL cases over the course of the academic year. For each case, half the student groups were led by faculty and the other half by a student group member selected randomly to serve in the facilitator role. Learning outcomes were assessed by performance on objective examinations covering factual materials pertinent to the case. Perceptions of facilitator behaviours and of group functioning were assessed with a questionnaire completed at the end of each individual case. Focus-group discussions were held to gain more in-depth information about student perceptions and experience. Student-led sessions were observed at random by the investigators. SETTING: A state-supported, US medical school with a hybrid lecture-based and problem-based curriculum. SUBJECTS: One hundred and twenty-seven second-year medical students and 30 basic science and clinical faculty. RESULTS: No differences were detected in student performance on the objective evaluation based on whether the facilitator was a faculty member or peer group member, nor were there any differences in the perceptions of group process. Students gave peer facilitators slightly higher ratings in the second semester of the experiment. In the focus-group discussions, students voiced a general preference for student-led groups because they felt they were more efficient. Observation and focus-group reports suggest that groups led by students sometimes took short cuts in the PBL process. CONCLUSION: In a hybrid lecture- and PBL-based curriculum, student performance on objective examinations covering PBL materials is unaffected by the status of the facilitator (student vs. faculty). However, in peer-facilitated groups, students sometimes took short cuts in the PBL process that may undermine some of the intended goals of PBL.

Attitude of Health Personnel