[Research in general medicine, role of the medical thesis]

General practice doctors are naturally presented as being actors on the front lines of public health. The ability of general practitioners to be aware of and deal with public health questions largely depends upon their training. Perhaps one could consider the general practitioner's thesis as a preparatory analytical work within the area of their future field of practice. Do these theses serve to provide food for thought on general practice and its contribution to public health, and if not, could they? An analysis conducted within four medical schools in western France demonstrates that the work produced for general medicine identified as such only constitutes a fraction of the overall number of medical (non-university) theses (approximately 5%). Two possible explanations may be put forward. First, on the one hand, the theses highly depend on the context of the training and the work produced is a direct result of this. Second, on the other hand, the current methods of indexing notes in the university databases does not enable general medicine to be clearly seen and visibly recognised as an academic discipline. Two questions then remain: Can medical theses be considered as research? Should research in general medicine be carried out solely by general practitioners? It is vital that resources from outside the medical field be raised and mobilised for general practice research, whose themes are multi-disciplinary and not only clinical.