Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Adoption of SI Units

Adoption of SI Units To the Editor.— Metrication in US medicine is still proceeding at a painfully slow pace (240:1618, 1978). Physicians appear reluctant to accept a change for several reasons. The numbers reflecting the usually encountered ranges in health and various diseases will have to be revised. Decision points established by years of clinical experience must be altered.Clear-cut advantages in improving patient care are not immediately apparent. An older generation accepted a change in electrolyte reporting units because they could use Gamble's approach to electrolyte balance more conveniently. We lack similar schemes for easily showing the interrelationships of other laboratory data.Side issues in implementing the International System of Units (SI) distract attention from the main thrust. Molar vs mass units, Celsius vs Kelvin temperature, IU vs Katal enzyme units, and mm Hg or torr vs pascal pressure controversies have stirred emotions and divided efforts. Metrication using the officially http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png JAMA American Medical Association

Adoption of SI Units

Willard, Rodney E.
JAMA , Volume 242 (7) – Aug 17, 1979
Download PDF
1 page

Adoption of SI Units

Abstract



To the Editor.—
Metrication in US medicine is still proceeding at a painfully slow pace (240:1618, 1978). Physicians appear reluctant to accept a change for several reasons.
The numbers reflecting the usually encountered ranges in health and various diseases will have to be revised. Decision points established by years of clinical experience must be altered.Clear-cut advantages in improving patient care are not immediately apparent. An older generation accepted a change in electrolyte...
Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/adoption-of-si-units-dZU8C90cc0

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright © 1979 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved. Applicable FARS/DFARS Restrictions Apply to Government Use.
ISSN
0098-7484
eISSN
1538-3598
DOI
10.1001/jama.1979.03300070016014
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

To the Editor.— Metrication in US medicine is still proceeding at a painfully slow pace (240:1618, 1978). Physicians appear reluctant to accept a change for several reasons. The numbers reflecting the usually encountered ranges in health and various diseases will have to be revised. Decision points established by years of clinical experience must be altered.Clear-cut advantages in improving patient care are not immediately apparent. An older generation accepted a change in electrolyte reporting units because they could use Gamble's approach to electrolyte balance more conveniently. We lack similar schemes for easily showing the interrelationships of other laboratory data.Side issues in implementing the International System of Units (SI) distract attention from the main thrust. Molar vs mass units, Celsius vs Kelvin temperature, IU vs Katal enzyme units, and mm Hg or torr vs pascal pressure controversies have stirred emotions and divided efforts. Metrication using the officially

Journal

JAMA – American Medical Association

Published: Aug 17, 1979

There are no references for this article.