University of Michigan, 300 N Ingalls Building, 6E08, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-0456, USA.
Pediatrics. 2010 Mar;125(3):574-7. doi: 10.1542/peds.2009-1976. Epub 2010 Feb 1.
Historically, the specialties classified as "primary care" have been pediatrics, internal medicine, and family medicine. Often, primary care disciplines are aggregated in workforce or career-preference studies, and any differences among them are not assessed or reported. However, such aggregation is likely unwarranted and may actually lead to false or misguided policy direction in the name of "primary care disciplines" when, in fact, there may be substantive differences among these specialties. We examine here the data available to assess whether the physicians who make up 2 of the primary care specialties are necessarily the same with regard to their perspectives on the economic aspects of medicine in general, or their own personal economic preferences regarding career choice in particular. Recent research has demonstrated that there are substantive differences among internal medicine trainees and pediatric trainees. As such, we must be cautious when using data from 1 primary care specialty to suggest structural and/or policy changes regarding the economic structure of training for the others.
从历史上看，被归类为“初级保健”的专业有儿科、内科和家庭医学。通常，初级保健学科会在劳动力或职业偏好研究中被聚合在一起，而且它们之间的任何差异都不会被评估或报告。然而，这种聚合可能是没有根据的，并且实际上可能会导致以“初级保健学科”的名义制定错误或误导性的政策方向，而实际上这些专业之间可能存在实质性差异。我们在这里研究了可用的数据，以评估构成 2 个初级保健专业的医生是否在一般医学的经济方面的观点上，或者在特定的职业选择的个人经济偏好上是相同的。最近的研究表明，内科住院医师和儿科住院医师之间存在实质性差异。因此，当我们使用来自 1 个初级保健专业的数据来建议其他专业的培训经济结构的结构和/或政策变化时，我们必须谨慎。
