Clinical documentation is foundational to high-quality primary care but remains variable in accuracy, completeness, and usefulness. While often viewed as administrative task, documentation plays a critical role in clinical decision-making, population health measurement, health policy, and advocacy. In U.S. primary care settings, studies report that 40–50% of patient issues discussed during visits are incompletely captured in clinical notes, leading to missed opportunities for follow-up and care coordination. Poor documentation undermines quality measurement, risk adjustment, and system-level planning. Conversely, optimized and structured documentation improves outcomes, increasing compliance by 15–20% and enhancing population health metrics reporting.To review existing literature on clinical documentation practices in primary care, examining documentation quality, impact on care delivery and continuity, and implications for leadership, advocacy, and health systems strengthening, with a focus on family physicians.A structured literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar for English-language studies published between 2013 and 2025. Search terms included "primary care documentation,” “clinical note quality,” “electronic health records,” “documentation workflow,” and “health systems.” Inclusion criteria encompassed peer-reviewed studies evaluating documentation outcomes related to care quality, workflow efficiency, population health measurement, or system performance. Non–primary care specialties and non-empirical reports were excluded. Findings were synthesized narratively to identify key trends and leadership implications.A prospective observational study of 49 primary care encounters in the U.S. Veterans Affairs system demonstrated frequent omission of patient-initiated concerns and unverified information in nearly half of clinical notes. Structured and standardized documentation improved documentation quality scores by approximately 12.8 points compared with unstructured notes. Consistent documentation patterns correlated with improved efficiency and reduced clinician burden. Family physician–led practices implementing standardized documentation protocols demonstrated enhanced care continuity, improved risk adjustment accuracy, and more efficient reporting for quality improvement and policy initiatives.Highlight documentation as critical for improving clinical quality, population health measurement, and system accountability. Optimized documentation supports accurate representation of patient complexity, strengthens continuity of care, and enables actionable data for advocacy and policy engagement.Optimized clinical documentation improves care quality, efficiency, and population health monitoring, influencing health policy and system performance. As family physicians, leveraging documentation as a leadership and advocacy tool.

In a context of crises and challenges (aging population with increasing multimorbidity, decreasing number of healthcare professionals, need for a One Health approach, numerical revolution...), where social determinants of health need to be better adressed, primary care, and notably general practice, are a chance to build and strenghten a more sustainable, resilient and efficient healthcare system.  This requires to better define our profession, for both GPs and all stakeholders involved in health and health policies.The XXX College of General Practice (XXX) missionned a 9-member steering committee from its member structures to update the previous professionnal framework. A collaborative and iterative process was conducted. We reviewed pre-existing frameworks in XXX and in the literature. We sought for contributions on the present and future perspectives for general practice from the structures representing the profession, from representatives of other primary and secondary healthcare professionnals, from patient's representatives and from stakeholders and experts in healthcare policies. A concertation conference gathering representatives from the XXX structures was held in december 2024. The steering committee subsequently synthetised these data and analysed it in light of the existing and upcoming challenges to produce a document, that was approved by the XXX structures in March 2025.Despite diversity and divergences, the XXX structures agreed on the updated professionnal framework. Since its publication, it was presented to several stakeholders and in debates about general practice. It will continue to be presented, notably to the national health insurance direction.Presenting our work could participate in inspiring participants from other countries to conduct similar works while providing us with a broader vision to enhance our ongoing national advocacy work.This work is in line with goal 1 (advancing Family Medicine) of WONCA strategic plan 2023-2027.

Health care systems are rapidly undergoing digital transformation, after relative slow adoption of medical informatics standards. E-health organisations are transforming national health care sectors and promoting the use of SNOMED CT as a reference terminology. The position of domain-specific classifications such as ICPC-3 within this transformation remains unclear.To describe the methodologies used for mapping the reference terminology SNOMED CT as source to the International Classification of Primary Care (ICPC-3) as target; to report on preliminary results; to describe planned future work and strategies.Three different approaches were used: 1) using the Belgian Bilingual Biclassified thesaurus (a large, aligned collection of Dutch and French words and phrases used in primary care), linked to a dyad of ICPC-2 and ICD-10 codes, and to SNOMED CT as a starting point. An ICPC-2 to ICPC-3 conversion table was used to generate a selection of possible ICPC-3 classes per SNOMED CT concept, followed by human validation; 2) Semantic manual comparison of the two hierarchies by studying parents and children in SNOMED CT and class labels, exclusion and inclusion terms in ICPC-3; 3) Automated mapping based on label similarity (exact string match and fuzzy matches) validated by experts.ICPC-3 candidate matches were selected for 4.163 SNOMED-CT concepts. After filtering for mappings with only one candidate, the conversion table approach retrieved 1339 SNOMED-CT concepts and 343 ICPC-3 classes. The manual approach was applied to 1 of the 200 clinical issues for graduate and vocational training in general practice, starting with a use case on “low-back pain” and identifying 250 concepts. Results from the automated mapping approach are still pending and will be presented at the time.Three methods for mapping were established and validated in a sample of SNOMED CT codes and a collection of ICPC-3 classes. Further progress can be made by using crowdsourcing with international teams of researchers and Primary Care teaching facilities.It is possible to construct sophisticated terminological resources that link language, reference terminologies and aggregation terminologies, which may support medical documentation and clinical coding by general practitioners at the point of care, either directly or as part of AI solutions.

The status of family medicine as a speciality requires academic leads for both primary care teaching and research. In medical education, there is clear evidence that graduates in medicine are more likely to choose family medicine if they have had positive role models in their medical schools, and good clinical placements with family doctors. But in many countries, opportunities to develop an academic career are underfunded compared to other specialities; and posts in universities for family doctors are few in proportion to their overall numbers and needs. This presentation will summarise the data from one country, show reasons why this matters, and also show things that we can do to help .Slide presentation of history of family medicine in the UK, its academic profile, current challenges, evidence of need for change, and examples of good practice that can alter the situation in a sustainable manner.Academic family doctors are essential for teaching medical students about family medicine - its patients, its contribution to population health, and its core clinical expertise. They are also vital for medical research, to recruit in primary care and give an informed applied primary care perspective to clinical and social research studies. Countries who - include family medicine in medical training; include academic skill development in speciality training schemes; have consistent funding available for suitable candidates from family medicine to undertake doctorate qualifications; and who dedicate funding to university appointments for family medicine - have stronger family medicine workforce and research outputs, and have a stronger national profile for the speciality.Attendees can consider the extent to which they and their member organisations get involved with teaching and research, and how to contribute to this aspect of our speciality from a practical and professional perspective.This will be an awareness raising presentation, and hopefully will engage the audience to consider their own collaborations with academic colleagues.

Primary care faces growing complexity, driven by demographic shifts, chronic disease, and digitalization. These pressures risk reducing care to protocols and productivity, undermining humanistic values. This paper introduces the Dutch model of the kaderhuisarts — a general practitioner with advanced expertise. This ‘expert generalist’ offers a structured approach to maintain quality and innovation in primary care.Supported by national GP organizations (LHV, NHG, InEen, UNH), this model combines 10 medical subspecialty training programs and 11 expert groups across domains such as asthma/COPD, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, mental health, elderly care, palliative care, urogynaecology, musculoskeletal medicine, sexual health, and emergency care.They provide consultation, deliver tailored education, and contribute to guideline development, policy and research. Their competencies—advising, initiating projects, teaching, and driving research—position them as bridge-builders between science and practice, and between primary and secondary care. They add value to guideline development by integrating evidence with practical insights, ensuring applicability and consistency across practices.A structured analysis of the training programs and expert groups, articles in the opinion journal 'Huisarts en Wetenschap' and feedback from the national GP organizations provide a picture of structured development and recent reform towards uniform training and governance in the Dutch expert generalist model over 20 years. They sustain person-centered care, strengthen quality, and enhance collaboration and resilience in healthcare systems.By investing in expert generalists, health systems can mitigate fragmentation and reinforce fraternity and solidarity. In an era of efficiency and scarcity, such commitment is essential—without it, primary care risks losing its human soul.

Access to primary care remains a persistent challenge in XXX, compounded by limited transparent and timely reporting across jurisdictions. OurCare, the country’s largest public engagement initiative on primary care, engaged nearly 10,000 people to create the OurCare Standard—defining what people expect from their primary care system.To assess the extent to which primary care in xxx is meeting patient and public expectations set out in the OurCare Standard.We conducted a cross-sectional, bilingual online survey developed with input from clinicians, researchers, policy-makers, and patient and caregiver advocates. Eligible participants were national residents aged 18 or older. Respondents were recruited through a proprietary online panel and public outreach, including television, radio, newspapers, social media, and partner networks. Only complete responses were analyzed. Data were weighted to reflect the xxx adult population on sex, age, education, region, language, immigration-status, and race. All analyses used weighted data.We analyzed 16,299 complete responses. Overall, 81.0% (95% CI: 79.9%-82.2%) reported having a family doctor or nurse practitioner, and an additional 1.4% (95% CI: 1.0%-1.7%) reported receiving care from a primary care clinic or team. Only 36.9% of those with a regular clinician obtained a same-day (20.1%, 95% CI: 18.1%-22.1%) or next-day (16.8%, 95% CI: 14.8%-18.8%) appointment for an urgent issue. 11.6% of people with a regular clinician reported experiencing some form of discrimination, compared to 22.8% of those without one. 67.2% of people with a regular clinician were satisfied or very satisfied with supports for their general well-being versus 28.7% of those without. Only 27.8% of respondents were satisfied (22.3%, 95% CI: 21.1%-23.5%) or very satisfied (5.5%, 95% CI: 4.9%-6.1%) with how the country's primary care system is working.Despite universal health insurance, OurCare survey results suggests that almost 1 in 5 people in XXX do not have access to primary care. Only a minority of those with primary reported timely access for an urgent issue. Those without a regular primary care clinician report more discrimination and less support for general well-being.The current primary care system in XXX falls short of people's vision for an accessible, wellness-oriented, inclusive and responsive system.

Chronic conditions are extremely common, with approximately 1 million people in Ireland affected by the top 4 conditions alone. This is expected to significantly increase in the future due to Ireland’s aging population. The HRB Primary Care Clinical Trials Network, using the James Lind Alliance (JLA) Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) method, have developed a Top Ten list of priority research questions for managing chronic conditions in primary care in Ireland.The JLA method results in ranked lists of unanswered research questions which can be used to direct researchers, funders, and other key interest holders to topics most important to those directly affected by a given condition. In this PSP, the objective was to provide a foundational resource for people wishing to carry out impactful research in primary care in Ireland and beyond.The project was led by a steering group of patients and representatives, carers, and clinicians, and all stages of the process centred these interest holders. In the PSP method, partnerships collect submissions to be grouped and formed into indicative questions, checked against existing literature to identify under-researched topics, and ranked in a process that centres patients, carers, and clinicians.This resulted in 20 ranked priority questions, with a focus on the Top Ten which covers a range of areas including information exchange, non-drug treatments, multidisciplinary care, and use of health care data.Our work since the determination of the top priorities has been to promote this as a tool to align research and service provision to the priorities of patients, carers, and healthcare professionals. Alongside traditional dissemination, this has involved engaging with funders, researchers, patient organisations and health services. This presentation will reflect on the value of the process in determining research priorities, and on key learnings from the equally important work to integrate priorities into active research.The use of the equitable JLA PSP method results in a robust and meaningful output of prioritised research topics, ready for us in Ireland and beyond. The integration of such priorities into research and service provision is a key part of the process, though comparatively understudied and unaddressed by resources.