【24h】

Changing practice with ewidence-based aphorisms

机译:循证格言改变惯例

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The Australian Family Physician {AFP) is thejournalof the RCGP'sAustralian cousin, the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners-consider it Neighbours to the BJGP's Eastenders. The AFP has : started an interesting series of articles looking at the evidence behind some medical aphorisms. They have examined whether a careful history leads to the diagnosis 80% of the time (perhaps, but half the diagnosis was in the referral letter)1 and : whether a doctor who treats him or herself has a fool for a patient (Yes).2 Wouldn't it be interesting to know if there is anything behind all those other sentences we vaguely remember from medical school; if only to justify passing them on proudly to medical students ourselves. After all, they are often the only things we do remember from medical school
机译:澳大利亚家庭医师(AFP)是RCGP的澳大利亚表亲(澳大利亚皇家全科医生学院)的期刊,认为它与BJGP的Eastenders相邻。法新社:已经开始了一系列有趣的文章,着眼于某些医学格言背后的证据。他们检查了是否有仔细的病史在80%的时间里会导致诊断(也许,但诊断的一半是在转诊信中)1,以及:治疗他或她自己的医生是否对病人有傻瓜(是)。 2知道我们在医学院里还记得的所有其他句子后面是否还有任何东西,这不是很有趣吗?只是为了证明自己自豪地将它们传递给医学生是合理的。毕竟,它们经常是我们医学院唯一记得的东西

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号