TY - JOUR
T1 - Answering the “100 Most Important Family Medicine Research Questions” from the 1985 Hames Consortium
AU - Ledford, Christy J.W.
AU - Britz, Jacqueline B.
AU - McKew, Melinda L.
AU - von Gal, Mia V.
AU - Balachandran, Neha
AU - Middleton, L. A.
AU - Seehusen, Dean A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 American Board of Family Medicine. All rights reserved.
PY - 2024/11
Y1 - 2024/11
N2 - Introduction: The 1985 Hames Consortium convened family medicine researchers to identify outstanding questions in their practice. Method: In this descriptive review, we collected, codified, and analyzed available literature to describe the availability of evidence to answer these questions. Results: Of 136 total questions, researchers rated 33 questions as not at all answered (24.2%), 49 questions as somewhat answered (36.0%), 37 as mostly answered (27.2%), and 17 as fully answered – will implement in practice (12.5%). Notably, 2 of the categories with the highest number of total questions, community oriented primary care and the value of comprehensive care, had the highest percentage of unanswered questions. Discussion: The Hames 100 questions and categories themselves demonstrate the values and purpose of family medicine research and can serve as a powerful tool to discuss the future of family medicine research. The varied questions illustrate the broad scope of interest of family physicians in 1985, which remains just as relevant today. Our findings indicate that relatively few questions were fully answered, with even fewer questions answered in family medicine journals.
AB - Introduction: The 1985 Hames Consortium convened family medicine researchers to identify outstanding questions in their practice. Method: In this descriptive review, we collected, codified, and analyzed available literature to describe the availability of evidence to answer these questions. Results: Of 136 total questions, researchers rated 33 questions as not at all answered (24.2%), 49 questions as somewhat answered (36.0%), 37 as mostly answered (27.2%), and 17 as fully answered – will implement in practice (12.5%). Notably, 2 of the categories with the highest number of total questions, community oriented primary care and the value of comprehensive care, had the highest percentage of unanswered questions. Discussion: The Hames 100 questions and categories themselves demonstrate the values and purpose of family medicine research and can serve as a powerful tool to discuss the future of family medicine research. The varied questions illustrate the broad scope of interest of family physicians in 1985, which remains just as relevant today. Our findings indicate that relatively few questions were fully answered, with even fewer questions answered in family medicine journals.
KW - ADFM/NAPCRG Research Summit 2023
KW - Evidence-Based Medicine
KW - Family Medicine
KW - Hames Consortium
KW - Practice-Based Research
KW - Research
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105002072775
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105002072775#tab=citedBy
U2 - 10.3122/jabfm.2024.240130R1
DO - 10.3122/jabfm.2024.240130R1
M3 - Article
C2 - 39547811
AN - SCOPUS:105002072775
SN - 1557-2625
VL - 37
SP - S106-S121
JO - Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine
JF - Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine
ER -