Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23121737›Full record

ArticleGlobal journal of health science2012

Chaos in Western Medicine: how issues of social-professional status are undermining our health.

Nathan W Wilson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global journal of health science, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Nathan W Wilsonnathan.w.wilson@gmail.com

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

From the period immediately following the second world war, western (orthodox) medicine - both as a philosophy of medicine and as a professional guild of medical professionals actively practicing medicine - has made progress in leaps and bounds, especially considering the advances in technology and associated enterprises. Over the last thirty years, however, the practice of orthodox medicine has taken a turn for the worst despite progressive philosophies and tenets of basic practice as offered by the professional bodies that regulate how medicine is operated and implemented. Current healthcare environments are in a chaotic state of affairs, most notably due to issues involving affordability of medical professionals. It is argued that the social-professional status of medical doctors allow exorbitant and unreachable demands on governments for increased salaries. The title-based supremacy of doctors within the occupations domain is not supported by what they are offering society at large, and it compromises the ability of medical institutions and governments to provide better and more affordable healthcare. From a sociological point of view, this paper examines the social-religious history of such social class-based occupational power and dominance, and paves the way toward an overhaul of current medical education frameworks that proactively will ensure greater occupational equity in healthcare settings, across all healthcare disciplines tasked with patient care and improvement of healthcare services. In essence, doctoral titles should only be awarded after successful completion of postgraduate doctoral studies, and a new breed of medical professionals must emerge, able to contribute more meaningfully to the advancement of medicine as a profession, as well as toward increased standards of healthcare and improved health services delivery.

Indexed as

Sociology, MedicalEducation, MedicalGlobal HealthHealth PersonnelHumansMedicinePhilosophy, MedicalPhysiciansProfessional RoleWestern World

Identifiers

PMID23121737
PMCPMC4777009

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.