Lay Evaluation of Medicine and Medical Practice: Report of a Pilot Study

Author:

Calnan Michael

Abstract

Sociologists appear to differ in the way they portray the public's ideas about modern medicine. Some argue that the public accepts that modern medicine is effective, and others say that as a whole the public is skeptical about its value. There is a dearth of empirical evidence about what the public thinks of modern medicine; this pilot study attempts to fill this gap. Tape-recorded interviews were carried out with small samples of women from Social Classes I and II and Classes IV and V to find out what they felt about the value of modern medicine and to identify the criteria that they used to assess a “good” and “bad” medical practitioner. The results showed that there is some degree of skepticism about the value of modern medicine, particularly amongst working-class people. However, the criteria for assessing the performance of a medical practitioner were only rarely seen to be tied up with the criteria used to assess the value of modern medicine.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Health Policy

Cited by 43 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3