Talk:General practitioner

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Edward Jenner Picture[edit]

Edward Jenner's picture needs some kind of description, considering its non-relation to the entire first paragraph. 121.223.124.11 (talk) 16:46, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted[edit]

Deleted some incorrect references to primary and secondary care. See new entries at Medicine#Settings_where_medical_care_is_delivered for definitions. 2004 Aug 1 Petersam 07:43, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC) Revised a grammatical error by excising a comma. -- Isaac D. of isaac.tblog.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.216.210.34 (talk) 12:46, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

France[edit]

Check if the word "propédeutique" is still in use. Explain DCEM and TCEM. Check the length of "internat". Explain that the MD is different from other (research) doctorates.

"hospitalisation without consent"

I'd like comments from native English speakers: is the meaning of this phrase (psychiatric commitment) clear for them? Yahoo and Google return about 20 pages only for this query.

The France section overlaps with Physician#France .

Apokrif 10:47, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)


The phrase "hospitalisation without consent" is clear to native english speakers, but you might consider presenting it more fully as: "hospitalisation without consent (that is, coerced admission to a secured inpatient ward)"

I wouldn't. That "clarification" seems a lot harder to understand than the original phrase to me.

UK - Family doctor's[edit]

It says that "family doctor is commonly used in the UK"

I disagree, most people in Britain call it their GP.

Panthro 15:32, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article lacked a balanced view before I edited it. What about Shipman, Roy Meadow and all the other enquiries and issues that have led to the reform of the NHS in previous years? Acontributor 15:18, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Family doctor is a formal name by the sounds of it, but as a former Londoner I can testify to the fact that most say GP. Even the BBC uses GP's in general.Tourskin 00:46, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


It may be of note here that it is wise for the young general practitioner to remember that the patient is always right about the questions he manages to ask about his illness without being prompted, even when he manages to die from his own mistakes as a result, and not the medical profession’s. Unknown13,31, 24 Dec 2013 (UTC)

FP in US[edit]

Family Practice in the US (and Canada) should be a separate article from GP as they are a separate specialty. Ace-o-aces 15:58, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Family Practice in Brazil[edit]

Renato Sabbatini, I'm undergoing Medical Residency in Family Practice in Ribeirão Preto, and I felt strange about the affirmation that the FP team is made of 1 to 4 medical doctors; while I'm aware that some places in Brazil have a Pediatrician in the team, at my knowledge most teams have only one medical doctor, one nurse, one to two nurse assistants, and up to 12 (usually 4-6) ACS. — User:Leonardo Ferreira Fontenelle, 2006-06-14 03:26 UTC

ARE US TRAINED OSTEOPATHIC PHYSICIANS ALLOWED TO PRACTICE IN ITALY. I AM AN OSTEOPATH WITH 20 YEARS PRACTICE.DR DEMARCO 11:36, 29 August 2006 (UTC)CHARLENE[reply]

uk[edit]

aside from having an id and proof of address, what else is required to see a gp in the uk? in canada, a care card is issued and required to see a doctor.

They might wanna do identity cards in uk, but the government is stilla little sketchy on them. I can't remeber if they tried to have it passed in parliament.Tourskin 00:47, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most patients seen by GP's in the UK are registered with a particular practice who therefore already have their details. Patients can be seen as 'temporary residents' or for 'immediately necessary treatment' by filling in a form if they are away from their usual practice's area. Foreign naionals can be seen using the same system but if they are not from a european union country or from certain other countries with which the UK has a reciprocal arrangement then a fee is payable. Doctorpete 07:23, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Working conditions compared with specialists[edit]

According to the intro, "There has been a steady decrease in family physicians in the last few decades, due to the long work hours and little pay compared to most specialists." But surely this is wrong for the UK, where the recent GP contract gives them a pay rise and shorter working hours? Tamino 19:51, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since the new contract in 2004 UK GP's have been able to opt out of out of hours cover and their earnings have risen linked to quality targets. This state of affairs has made the specialty more popular at least in the short term but it would appear both these factors may be under threat so watch this space! Doctorpete 07:55, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A bit confused[edit]

I looked up "general practice" here on Wikipedia and found this article about physicians. Rather, I was looking for an article about GP lawyers. Am I looking in the wrong place? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.96.184.105 (talk) 22:20, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


i am a gp in pakistan . i feel the conditions for working as gp are worst here. u are on ur own. patient expect u 24 hour avail able, and expects the best medical cove like a specialist and pays u little as they pay tp quakes . and the government has set no rules of business it is do-your own and it given way all types of coruption. it is hard for a fare gp to survive while those are bad guys are developing . thats is why people dont want to be a gp —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.154.6.158 (talk) 02:22, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Terminology[edit]

The terms GP and FP mean different things when used within the United States. However, in Australia and New Zealand for example the term GP when used here refers to someone who has completed 3-4 years of General practice (aka Family practice) post graduate specialty training. Anyone who completes the Australian/NZ General practice training program is USA "Board Eligible" by the ABFM. See: Reciprocity Agreement. In Aus/NZ a "general practitioner" is 100% equivalent to a US "family practitioner". The information regarding the different usage of the terms in different regions should be retained within this article. Thank you Jwri7474 (talk) 05:15, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Medicine/Dermatology task force[edit]

I wanted to know if you (or any friends of yours) are interested in dermatology, and would be willing to help me with the WikiProject Medicine/Dermatology task force? kilbad (talk) 04:43, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could anyone pls kindly provide the info of the standard GP practice in US and UK???[edit]

I just added the section of the standardization of Royal Australian College of General Practitioners —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.228.190.54 (talk) 04:16, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Major Edit US about the General Physician[edit]

I just reverted a large undiscussed edit. It lacks sources and is at points unduly promotional of this organization. Please discuss here. - Eldereft (cont.) 21:39, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good Morning. I am struggling as to how to do this process, and how to communicate with a moderator or editor. I just found this area. I also see a "talk" area, but not sure how to access it.

The term Family Practice and General Practice are now different and seperate entities in the U.S.

The only certifying body for General Practice is the A.A.G.P. Without getting too bogged down with the various organization, the AAGP (American Academy of General Physicians), the Board certification process is through the ABGP (American Board of General Practice), and the educational arm is the ACGM (Americam College of General Medicine).

In the discussion it seems to perhaps confuse the A.A.F.P and General Practice. The A.A.F.P. is the organization that is affiliated with Board Certification though the A.B.F.P (American Board of Family Practice). The A.A.G.P is the organization that is affiliated with the A.B.G.P. (American Board of General Practice). Both are seperate and independant organizations.

There is no other organization other than the A.A.G.P. and their affiliate Board Certification process through the A.B.G.P., that provides a Board Certifying process and training other than these organizations. This is what was discussed in this edit, and perhaps some of the background.

Please explain the process of updating the U.S. part of this section. Thanks.

Steven S. Herbets, M.D. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DrSteveHe (talk • contribs) 18:49, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it appears that your previous edits have been reverted because they were thought to have been vandalism. Please do not be offended by this; we get lots of nonsense added to our site all the time and sometimes people are quick on the revert button. We really do want newcomers to join and add their knowledge. However, it might be best if you first spend a few minutes reading some of the basic Wikipedia guidelines, so that your edits will be more appropriate in terms of style and thus will be less likely to be mistaken for vandalism. In particular, it is important supply reliable sources supporting your addition, and to use a neutral point of view. Best wishes and I hope you decide to stay here. --Zvika (talk) 18:57, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I guess I am somewhat unclear as to how to proceed? I guess I am unclear what "vandalism" is suspected, and why? There is no vandalism here. I will read the guidelines, and perhaps do some more edits!? Perhaps change the style? And try to get sources, although the sources are from the parent organizations. I am a member of both the AAFP and the AAGP, and understand the differences between the 2 organizations as well. I will attempt to stay neutral, and keep the edits neutral with no particular point of views. I will learn. Hey, I just learned how to sign this! Thanks. --DrSteveHe (talk) 19:21, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


OK. Here is another try. Please let me know if this is better. Thanks. DrSteveHe (talk) 23:52, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The most reliable way to prevent people from thinking that you're just making up plausible nonsense is to cite your sources. This is extremely important, because once we've got a fact and a source, if someone comes along and changes it, we've got a chance of figuring out whether the change is acceptable. I've marked some of the statements that you might want to source. In general, there should be about one source for every paragraph.
You also need to be more careful about the writing style. Some of the problems are doubtless due to trying very hard to be understood (addressing the reader as "you"), but others are probably careless errors. For example, the word "physician" is only spelled with a capital letter at the beginning when it is the first word in a sentence.
It is important that the article not sound like a sales pitch for (or against) GPs. We don't want to 'blame' anyone or 'sell' anyone on anything. For example, we probably don't need a long list of reasons, ranging from noble sentiments to discreditable skills, to explain why someone might prefer less time in school and greater daily variety to the extra training and sameness of a specialty. We want plain, even bare, facts, without becoming so long that nobody will read it.
Good luck, WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:44, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am a new Wikipedia editor. I found this article that needed citations, and thought it would be a good place to start. I am finding the formatting more dificult than I thought.

The original text from the "United States" section of the article: The existing general practitioners in the 1970s were given the choice to be grandfathered into the newly created specialty of Family Practice. As well, an Academy of Family Practice was created and The Academy of General Practice was allowed to die. The prior system of graduating from medical school and completing one year of post-graduate training (rotating internship) was abolished. If one wanted to become a "house-call-making" type of physician, one needed to stay in the academic setting two or three more years.[citation needed]

My edit with abbreviated citations: The existing general practitioners in the 1970s were given the choice to be grandfathered into the newly created specialty of Family Practice. As well, the American Academy of General Practice changed its name to the American Academy of Family Physicians.[1] The prior system of graduating from medical school and completing one year of post-graduate training (rotating internship) was abolished. If one wanted to become a "house-call-making" type of physician, one needed to stay in the academic setting two or three more years.[2]

  1. ^ About the AAFP
  2. ^ Millis Report

Questions about my edit:

1) Is it OK to cite the AAFP web site about the history of its own organization? Is this considered a third-party source? I could not find another source about the organization name change.

2) I am a family physician. Does this represent a conflict of interest and should I avoid editing an article about the difference between general practitioners and family practioners? I chose to start with this article because I had a good idea where I could find citations. I didn't intend to make content changes, but after doing some research I thought the original statement was inaccurate and should be corrected. I would like to correct a few more errors and try to write it with a more neutral POV, if that is OK.

3) Do my citations in the article match the format of the other citations? I found it difficult to tell. (I only included abbreviated citations on the talk page. The ones in the article are more detailed.)

Thanks for your help. --Willow Mc (talk) 02:03, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Overview on Family Medicine Training in Turkey

Most of the primary care work has to be done by general medical officers, including administrative and forensic work. But the Turkish Ministry of Health is targeting new training policies for the general Medical officers. In 2004 transitional training will be available to general Medical officers to be awarded with the certificate as family doctor (which is in distinction to the diploma of specailist of family medicine, which needs a three year postgraduate vocational training)

Highlights of Medical Education in Turkey Population of Turkey: 67,803,927; urban population: 64.9%; life expectancy: 68.8 years; infant mortality rate: 29 Undergraduate Medical Education Turkey had 50 Faculties of Medicine located in different areas in 2004.c Newer schools are expected to be established in the near future and 46 are accepting students for undergraduate training.d • Most teaching positions are full-time. Full professors and associate professors for more than 5 years are allowed to work part-time. Almost three-quarters work full-time.d • There is a 6-year curriculum. Students enter medical school after passing a national entrance examination after finishing high school ~11 years!. • Curriculum: study lasts 6 years:e 2 years of basic sciences, 3 years of clinical sciences, 1 year devoted to family practice ~internship!. • Entrance is limited to the best graduates ~first 9.19%! and a tuition fee is requested. Students attending a private university might have a lower examination score ~first 27.98%! but pay higher tuition fee.f • Number of students entering and attending last year of Faculty of Medicine: about 4,760 and 4,634, respectively. • Total number of registered medical students is 32,807.d • Students typically enter at age 17 and graduate at age 23 as medical doctors, who are allowed to work as such Graduate Medical Education • A low ratio of new graduates enter a specialty program. Almost 23% of 14,273 applicants were matched to a residency in autumn 2007.g Examination is given twice a year.e • Graduate specialty training is free and residents receive a salary from the hospital. • All specialty programs have a national admission test. • The specialties can only be obtained as residency programs provided by universities and Ministry of Health training and research hospitalsh ~43 specialties!. MSc and PhD degrees can be earned at the Institute of Health Sciences at universities. • The specialty of family medicine was created in 1984.h • Specialty programs have a heavy workload and the duration of residency is 3–6 years. • There are 95,110 active physicians. The national average is 721 people for one doctor. Number of medical doctors ~Faculty of Medicine graduates!i the number of specialists exceeds them: ie, 51,530 vs. 43,660 ~54% vs. 46%!.c • The number of doctors is higher in Central and Western Turkey.c • Despite an increase in the doctor workforce at the primary health care level, only 43% of primary health care center posts are occupied by medical practitioners.c • There are several public and private health care provider organizations.

Source: Güneş ED, Yaman H. Transition to Family Practice in Turkey. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions 2008; 28(2): 106-112.


Postgraduate education (Residency training) in Family Medicine In the early 1980s the first department of family medicine was established. In 1984 family medicine was recognised as a medical specialty and the first curriculum was announced. In 1985 the first family medicine residents were accepted for training for family medicine specialisation at state hospitals. At the beginning of the 1990s, education for family medicine flourished again. Nine teaching hospitals in three larger cities (Istanbul, Ankara, and Izmir) were in charge of training. In 1993, the Higher Council of Education accepted family medicine as an academic discipline and it was resolved that family medicine departments would be founded in all universities and family medicine specialists would be allowed to achieve academic careers there.

To gain access to a family medicine residency, the applicant must have graduated from a six-year undergraduate Medical education programme. According to the current curriculum in family medicine, the residency lasts three years. It consists of five main fields and the course schedule is shown in Table 2. On completion of the three-year course and passing the examination, the graduates are awarded a Specialist of Family Medicine title from the Ministry of Health. The current curriculum aims to produce graduates who are proficient in the management of common health problems and can provide timely emergency surgical and obstetric interventions. Graduates from these family medicine residencies are nowadays, working for the Ministry of Healths National Health System (Health Centers, Centers for Mother and Child Care, Emergency Services etc.) Some of them choose an academic career in one of the over fourty active departments of family medicine at the universities or work in private health institutions, such as health centres, hospitals, emergency centres.

Table 2. Course Schedule of my family medicine residency training in Turkey

Field Time (months) Child Health and Disease 9 İnternal Medicine 9 Gynaecology and Obstetrics 8 General surgery (with intense emergency participation) 6 Psychiatry 4 Source: Yaman H. Training in Family Medicine: The Current State in Turkey. Education for Primary Care 2002 ;13 (3):394 – 397.

A newer vocational/residency training scheme has been proposed by the Turkish Board of Family Medicine (Türkiye Aile Hekimliği Yeterlilik Kurulu) (Table 3). According to a regulation, which is has been enforced in January 2010, a new Postgarduate Training Committee in Family Medicine is preparing a new training scheme, which is in concordance with the proposed three year training time, proposed by the Ministry of Health new regulation.

Table 3: Proposed Training Program for Family Medicine Field Time (months) Family Practice 12 Internal Medicine 6 (1 month in cardiology outpatient) Pediatrics 6 Gynecology and Obstetrics 5 General Surgery 2 Psychiatry 3 Elective-1 1 Elective-2 1


References 1. Güneş ED, Yaman H. Transition to Family Practice in Turkey. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions 2008; 28(2): 106-112 2. Yaman H. Training in Family Medicine: The Current State in Turkey. Education for Primary Care 2002 ;13 (3):394 – 397 3. Turkish Board of Family Medicine. Working report and Core Curriculum of Family Medicine Specialization Education. (in Turkish). June. 2007. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hakanyaman (talk • contribs) 08:51, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch knowledge GP-test: Landelijke Huisartsgeneeskundige Kennistoets[edit]

The article states that it consists of "about 160" multiple choice questions, however the LHK home site mentions only 120 questions. So I'm going to change it. Furthermore, the cited page only implicitly mentions the LHK-test and so is not very relevant. Added reference: http://huisartsopleiding.nl/content.asp?kid=10072029&bid=10028521 Latrocinia (talk) 10:57, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In North America...[edit]

The passage I link to below states that "in North America the term (GP) has become somewhat ambiguous." I've noticed a general trend for well-meaning Wikipedia editors to replace instances of the "United States" or "America" with a more inclusive term "North America." But sometimes the term doesn't fit well. I was hoping for some clarification on the term's use. Where I live, Ontario (Canada's largest province) it is extremely common to refer to a family doctor as a GP. It's recently come to my attention that in the US a GP has substantially less training. The Canadian section is woefully underrepresented on here. It's got one line about a Canadian medical college. So is GP used in Canada or is it ambiguous? If it is ambiguous can we get a source on here or can I change the passage to read "In the United States." Just because something is common in the US does not mean that Canada—no matter how similar our two countries are—is going to be exact same. As the passage reads, there is a strong implication that GP does *not* mean the same as it does in other Commonwealth countries. Thanks.

"The term general practitioner or GP is common in the Republic of Ireland, the United Kingdom and several Commonwealth countries. In these countries the word physician is largely reserved for certain other types of medical specialists, notably in internal medicine. While in these countries, the term GP has a clearly defined meaning, in North America the term has become somewhat ambiguous, and is not necessarily synonymous with the term "family doctor" or primary care provider, as described below." Celynn (talk) 23:20, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on General practitioner. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:08, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on General practitioner. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:44, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on General practitioner. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:51, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge from Primary care physician[edit]

NOT MERGED
Belated close; per below, it looks like while they may overlap, PCP and GP are two distinct topics. (As a small procedural note, original proposer has been blocked for sockpuppetry.) (non-admin closure) Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 20:43, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


I propose merging Primary care physician into General practitioner. I think the content in Primary care physician can easily be explained in the context of General practitioner, and a merger would not cause any article-size or weighting problems in General practitioner.Lagelander (talk) 09:36, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support great idea, as with your proposal at Family medicine. I have always found the way there are so many articles in this area confusing. Differences are better explained in a 'variation by country' or equivalent section rather than lots of separate articles - which also fragments limited editor time and results in a lot of needless duplication. Thanks for proposing it. Tom (LT) (talk) 22:57, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support it's essentially two names for the same thing. Jezzerdo4 (talk) 20:09, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support synonymous Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:41, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • As I understand those articles are not synonymous. General practitioner is a type of primary care physician (as the family doctor and internist are). Here are some sources: [1], [2]. If those articles are to be merged, then the General practitioner must be merged into the Primary care physician. Here are some types of primary care physicians: [3]. --D6194c-1cc (talk) 15:12, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm a little doubtful about this. Where I live, you can have a gynecologist as your primary care physician, and that's not really a GP/family doctor/internist specialty. Also, to the extent that this is about patient understanding or designations by insurance companies, your primary care physician might not be a physician at all. Primary care provider redirects to Primary care. (See also Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dolyn/Archive; the editor who proposed this has been blocked.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:42, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tentative support, but the differences in national definitions need to be handled carefully. Btw Family doctor redirects to Family medicine, which perhaps it shouldn't. I'd never heard of internist before - I don't think they exist in the UK. Johnbod (talk) 03:38, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It all depends on the country you live in. Here is a review about general internists in several counties: [4], see Table 1 Summary of Clinical Roles Assumed by General Internists in Several Countries. And here's a presentation with some information about UK: [5]. Probably in UK internists are not primary care physicians. So primary care is very different between countries. In my country the term primary care physician is not used with exception of a few books, and family medicine appeared not so long ago. D6194c-1cc (talk) 07:51, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as proposed. (ooo, that rhymes!). Like D6194c-1cc and WhatamIdoing, I think that the direction is wrong. If there is a merge (and really, I don't think there should be one), it should go the other way. I believe that a general practitioner is one of the types of medical personnel who might be someone's Primary Care physician, but far from the only kind. Joyous! | Talk 22:45, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, as the topic of Primary care physician is an important one in the US, and in its modern guise is distinct from the role of General practitioner elsewhere in the world. Perhaps we could more clearly distinguish the pages with hatnotes, keeping Primary care physician as a US-specific page, and General practitioner covering the rest of the world. Klbrain (talk) 12:31, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:General_practitioner&oldid=1216774093"