MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Physician Behavior and Bedside Manners: The Influence of William Osler and the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine

2012· article· en· W1623694072 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Barry Silverman

Bibliographic record

VenueBaylor University Medical Center Proceedings · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGerontologyClassicsPsychologyFamily medicinePsychoanalysisHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The practice of medicine changes with time as we develop better techniques for diagnosis and improved therapies for treatment. The art of medicine remains constant over the millennia because human nature is unchanging. Patients bring fear, anxiety, and self-pity into the exam room. It has always been the doctor's responsibility to calm their fears and provide hope. The accomplished doctor has a bedside manner that is humane and compassionate, empathetic and supportive. Students are taught bedside skills, the art of medicine, by our senior, most experienced clinicians. However, in the past 20 years, more of these professors are laboratory scientists, often deficient or unpracticed in their bedside skills. Bernard Lown, the famous Boston cardiologist, wrote in 1996 in his book The Lost Art of Healing (1) how essential bedside behavior is to good medical care. He expressed his concern that important bedside skills are disappearing in our technology-focused practice of medicine. Several medical schools have recommended a new emphasis on improving professionalism. Jock Murray, former dean of the Dalhousie Medical School, speaking to the American College of Physicians in 2006, commented on the general erosion of professionalism and a growing public cynicism about the profession. He called for a new focus on the three core principles of professionalism: competency, the primacy of patient welfare, and social justice. Professionalism is not an attempt to protect physicians' power and status, he noted, but a call to practice medicine in patients' best interests (2). No physician has exerted a greater influence on how physicians should behave than Sir William Osler. His essays on the practice of medicine, his leadership in medical organizations, and his personal charisma established a paradigm that has served as a model for physician behavior at the bedside. His textbook of medicine, The Principles and Practice of Medicine, first published in 1892 (3), was the bible of rational medical therapy for 30 years. He was the first chief of medicine at the Johns Hopkins Hospital and Medical School, and his leadership at Johns Hopkins transformed American medical care. He led the effort to bring a scientific approach to the care of the patient. Osler famously said, “The practice of medicine is an art based on science” (4) (Figure). Figure Osler at the bedside of a patient. Photo from the Mark Silverman collection. Osler was a unique personality and practiced at a propitious time in medicine. At the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, medicine was evolving from a practice based on superstition and tradition into a rational biological science. His bedside manners were based on Victorian morals and their notion of the duties of a gentleman. But like the technophobe and iPad enthusiast of today, he eagerly embraced scientific medicine as the new hope for tomorrow. How did William Osler and the Johns Hopkins Medical School influence our current bedside behavior?

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.544

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBaylor University Medical Center ProceedingsSame topicPrimary Care and Health OutcomesFrench-language works237,207