A thematic content analysis of the structure and effects of good doctor abilities in China

TL;DR

This study identifies the key abilities of good doctors in China and how these abilities improve doctor performance and hospital development.

Contribution

The study proposes a novel model of good doctor abilities in China and interprets its effects using AMO theory.

Findings

Good doctor abilities are categorized into six types, including clinical empathy and communication.

These abilities positively impact doctors' work performance and social benefits.

The model provides criteria for improving doctor professionalism and regulating conduct.

Abstract

The efforts to explore and build the structure of good doctor abilities are important because they help improve the quality of education for medical students and better standardize the working performance of doctors. However, at present, no worldwide standards for such a structure have been established. In this study, we endeavoured to map the structure of good doctor abilities and identify their effects.

With a focus on China, a thematic content analysis was adopted in this study to analyse the personal profiles of 50 widely recognized good doctors. NVivo11 software was used.

The Structure and Effects of Good Doctor Abilities in China model was proposed, and interpretations were made based on AMO theory. Good doctor abilities fall within six categories: rigorous clinical thinking, skilled in diagnosis and therapy, clinical empathy, continuous learning and innovation, enhancing and sharing experiences, and communication and coordination. These abilities have positive impacts on doctors’ work performances and social benefits by encouraging good behaviours, ultimately promoting the sustainable development of the hospitals where they serve.

In this study, we established a model of the structure and effects of good-doctor abilities in China and interpreted its mechanism, innovation and theory diversification in “good-doctor” research. Moreover, this study has practical significance because it provides systematic and well-targeted criteria for improving the professionalism of doctors, promoting more good doctor behaviours, providing guidance for regulating doctors’ conduct and providing a reference for medical education and working performance reviews worldwide.

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-024-11145-2.

Figures