Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 8, 2026

Comparing Bibliometric Analysis Using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Databases
Published on: October 24, 2019
Uncertainty in general practice: A bibliometric analysis
Wendy Hu1, Celine Farkash2, Boaz Shulruf3
1MBBS (Hons), BSc (Med) (Hons), DCH, FRACGP, AFHEA, General Practitioner, Erskineville Doctors, Newtown, NSW; Lecturer in General Practice, Discipline of General Practice, School of Population Health, UNSW Medicine @ Health, Sydney, NSW.
Background And Objectives:
Uncertainty is often considered a defining feature of general practice, yet empirical comparisons across medical specialties are limited. This study investigates whether uncertainty is uniquely prevalent in general practice or a commonality of clinical work across medical disciplines.
Method:
A bibliometric analysis of 3757 articles from PubMed (1966-2025) was conducted. A total of 287 relevant studies were categorised by specialty and study type to assess thematic focus and empirical content.
Results:
Publications on uncertainty were comparable in number between general practice (n = 87) and non-general practice specialties (n = 94), with general practice publications showing a higher proportion of empirical studies (67% vs 61%). A recent acceleration in non-general practice literature suggests growing interdisciplinary interest.
Discussion:
Findings challenge the narrative of general practice exceptionalism regarding managing uncertainty, suggesting that uncertainty is a systemic feature of medical practice. This has implications for medical education, professional identity and cross-specialty collaboration.
Related Concept Videos
Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error
Propagation of Uncertainty from Random Error
Uncertainty: Confidence Intervals
Uncertainty: Overview
Uncertainty in Measurement: Reading Instruments
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...