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

Learn More →

Do We Have Time for the Change?

Do We Have Time for the Change? EDITORIAL T SEEMS too natural to me to suggest that medicine Unlike survey instruments used in the social sciences and is rapidly changing. I went to medical school in epidemiology, very few of these tools have been for- the early 1980s and was impressed by the rapid mally evaluated for reliability or validity. To my knowl- progress in our supposed understanding of disease edge, none has been evaluated for dermatology. I mechanisms. These advances were primarily ad- Physicians frequently criticize the use of patient sat- vances in “wet lab [laboratory]” sciences, such as immu- isfaction tools as a measure of quality of care. They argue nology and molecular biology. In the 1990s there has been that while the patient’s experience may be important to the a swift movement toward unlocking the genetic mechanism patient as a consumer, ultimately the outcome of the patient- of disease. Therapeutically, there have even been attempts physician encounter should be a measure of diagnostic ac- at altering the genetic makeup of an individual or their cells curacy or therapeutic efficacy. This is a reasonable point to cure or alter the progression of a disease. Yet, it seems of view. Scorecards have been used to http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png JAMA Dermatology American Medical Association

Do We Have Time for the Change?

JAMA Dermatology , Volume 134 (9) – Sep 1, 1998

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/do-we-have-time-for-the-change-OTx4YGgX1T
Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright 1998 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved. Applicable FARS/DFARS Restrictions Apply to Government Use.
ISSN
2168-6068
eISSN
2168-6084
DOI
10.1001/archderm.134.9.1151
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

EDITORIAL T SEEMS too natural to me to suggest that medicine Unlike survey instruments used in the social sciences and is rapidly changing. I went to medical school in epidemiology, very few of these tools have been for- the early 1980s and was impressed by the rapid mally evaluated for reliability or validity. To my knowl- progress in our supposed understanding of disease edge, none has been evaluated for dermatology. I mechanisms. These advances were primarily ad- Physicians frequently criticize the use of patient sat- vances in “wet lab [laboratory]” sciences, such as immu- isfaction tools as a measure of quality of care. They argue nology and molecular biology. In the 1990s there has been that while the patient’s experience may be important to the a swift movement toward unlocking the genetic mechanism patient as a consumer, ultimately the outcome of the patient- of disease. Therapeutically, there have even been attempts physician encounter should be a measure of diagnostic ac- at altering the genetic makeup of an individual or their cells curacy or therapeutic efficacy. This is a reasonable point to cure or alter the progression of a disease. Yet, it seems of view. Scorecards have been used to

Journal

JAMA DermatologyAmerican Medical Association

Published: Sep 1, 1998

References