<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: annals of internal medicine</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'annals of internal medicine'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22annals+of+internal+medicine%22&t=%22annals+of+internal+medicine%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:21:15 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Study Investigates Relief For Chronic Back Pain</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=5036231&amp;cid=t_130677_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fstudy-investigates-relief-for-chronic-back-pain%2F2011.07.17</link>
            <description>This study confirmed what I have known for a long time.  They looked at relaxation massage and structural massage, which focuses on correcting soft-tissue abnormalities.  At 10 weeks they found (more&amp;#8230;)

			
			*This blog post was originally published at EverythingHealth* (Source: Better Health)</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=5036231</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 17 Jul 2011 12:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">5036231</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Does Your Doctor Trust You?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4670109&amp;cid=t_130677_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fdoes-your-doctor-trust-you%2F2011.04.02</link>
            <description>Members of the  American public are frequently surveyed about their trust in various professionals.  Doctors and nurses usually wind up near the top of the list, especially when compared to lawyers, hairdressers and politicians.  Trust in professionals is important to us: they possess expertise we lack but need, to solve problems ranging from the serious (illness) to the relatively trivial (appearance).
How much professionals trust us seems irrelevant: our reciprocity is expressed in the form of payment for services rendered or promised, our recommendations to friends and families and repeat appearances.
So I was surprised to read an article in the Annals of Family Medicine describing a new scale to measure doctors’ trust in their patients.  This scale, based on input from focus grou...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4670109</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 02 Apr 2011 18:00:08 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4670109</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Colon Cancer Screening: Guideline Truths And Myths</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4600538&amp;cid=t_130677_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fcolon-cancer-screening-guideline-truths-and-myths%2F2011.03.16</link>
            <description>Colon cancer screening has a particular personal interest for me &amp;#8212; one of my colleagues in residency training had her father die of colon cancer when she was a teenager.
No one should lose a loved one to a disease that, when caught early, is often treatable. But for both men and women, colon cancer is the third most common cancer behind lung cancer and prostate cancer in men, and behind lung cancer and breast cancer in women, it&amp;#8217;s the second most lethal.
The problem is that patients are often confused about which test is the right one. Is it simply a stool test? Flexible sigmoidoscopy? Colonoscopy? Virtual colonoscopy? Isn&amp;#8217;t there just a blood test that can be done? (No.)
In simple terms, this is what you need to know:
All men and women age 50 and older should be scr...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4600538</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2011 13:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4600538</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Narrative Medicine: Healing Through Storytelling</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4501584&amp;cid=t_130677_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fnarrative-medicine-healing-through-storytelling%2F2011.02.21</link>
            <description>More in the evolving meme of narrative medicine: Researchers at the University of Massachusetts Medical School (my alma mater) have found that for a select population of individuals, listening to personal narratives helps control blood pressure. While the power of stories is old news, the connection to clinical outcomes is what’s newsworthy here. Read Dr. Pauline Chen’s nice piece in the New York Times. The implications for ongoing work in this area are mind boggling.
The Annals of Internal Medicine study authors sum it up nicely:
Emerging evidence suggests that storytelling, or narrative communication, may offer a unique opportunity to promote evidence-based choices in a culturally appropriate context.  Stories can help listeners make meaning of their lives, and listeners may be in...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4501584</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2011 16:00:32 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4501584</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Medical Journals, Doctors And Ties To Hedge Funds</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4377789&amp;cid=t_130677_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FaVe4cHW2HSM%2F</link>
            <description>In a move that some may consider long overdue, more than a dozen of the most prestigious medical journals will consider requiring doctors who submit studies to disclose any payments received from hedge funds and other large investors. The proposal is expected to be discussed at the next annual meeting of The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, which is scheduled for June, according to a spokeswoman for the New England Journal of Medicine.
The possibility follows ongoing concerns about conflicts of interest between researchers and the pharmaceutical industry and the extent to which undisclosed financial relationships may unduly influence medical research and, from there, medical practice. But the issue is also encompassing financial ties to large investors, given the growing...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4377789</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jan 2011 15:21:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4377789</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Health And The Value Of Open-Mindedness</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4314005&amp;cid=t_130677_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fon-the-value-of-open-mindedness%2F2011.01.05</link>
            <description>Three recent sto­ries lead me to my open­ing topic for the year: The value of open-mindedness. This char­ac­ter­is­tic — a state of recep­tive­ness to new ideas — affects how we per­ceive and process infor­ma­tion. It’s a qual­ity I look for in my doc­tors, and which I admire espe­cially in older people.
Piece #1 — On the brain’s matu­rity, flex­i­bil­ity and “cog­ni­tive fitness”
For the first piece, I’ll note a Dec 31 op-ed piece that appeared in the New York Times: This Year, Change Your Mind, by Dr. Oliver Sacks, the neu­rol­o­gist and author. In this thought­ful essay, he con­sid­ers the adult brain’s “mys­te­ri­ous and extra­or­di­nary” power to adapt and grow: “I have seen hun­dreds of patients with var­i­ous deficits &amp;#8212...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4314005</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jan 2011 22:00:57 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4314005</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Echinacea For Colds: Does It Really Work?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4302123&amp;cid=t_130677_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fechinacea-for-colds-does-it-really-work%2F2010.12.31</link>
            <description>This study is unlikely to change minds about whether to take this remedy.
Have you tried echinacea as a cold remedy? Has it worked? How do research findings, pro and con, affect your opinion of so-called alternative medicines?
Many of the echinacea studies, especially early on, were sponsored by companies making or selling the product. This study was supported by a grant from the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, which is part of the National Institutes of Health.
- Peter Wehrwein, Editor, Harvard Health Letter

			
			*This blog post was originally published at Harvard Health Blog* (Source: Better Health)</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4302123</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 31 Dec 2010 20:00:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4302123</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Business Of Anticoagulation</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4294629&amp;cid=t_130677_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fthe-business-of-anticoagulation%2F2010.12.28</link>
            <description>This is a guest post by Dr. Juliet Mavromatis:
**********
The emergence of a new generation of anticoagulants, including the direct thrombin inhibitor, dabigatran and the factor Xa inhibitor, rivaroxaban, has the potential to significantly change the business of thinning blood in the United States. For years warfarin has been the main therapeutic option for patients with health conditions such as atrial fibrillation, venous thrombosis, artificial heart valves and pulmonary embolus, which are associated with excess clotting risk that may cause adverse outcomes, including stroke and death. However, warfarin therapy is fraught with risk and liability. The drug interacts with food and many drugs and requires careful monitoring of the prothrombin time (PT) and international normalized ratio (IN...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4294629</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 28 Dec 2010 15:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4294629</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Sex Important to Older Men? Stop the Presses</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4233229&amp;cid=t_130677_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2010%2F12%2F06%2Fsex-important-to-older-men-stop-the-presses%2F</link>
            <description>Here&amp;#8217;s a news flash for you &amp;#8212; people like sex. Even older people. Wow, what an astounding insight into human behavior.
I think some people have this conception that older people are somehow, like, not normal. Like they don&amp;#8217;t have all the same needs, wants and desires as a younger person does. Like aging itself is some sort of disorder or disease that needs separate studying and understanding.
I&amp;#8217;ll let you in on a little secret &amp;#8212; most older folks don&amp;#8217;t feel their age. Most middle-age folks don&amp;#8217;t feel their age. Once you hit 25 or so, many people (most?) seem &amp;#8220;stuck in time&amp;#8221; in terms of their own self-image and what they imagine others see them as. Most people simply don&amp;#8217;t seem to feel their chronological age.

So your grandparents ...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4233229</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 07 Dec 2010 00:31:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4233229</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Understanding Treatment: The Communication Disconnect Between Doctors And Patients</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4214108&amp;cid=t_130677_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Funderstanding-treatment-the-communication-disconnect-between-doctors-and-patients%2F2010.11.30</link>
            <description>Over the long week­end I caught up on some read­ing. One arti­cle* stands out. It’s on informed con­sent, and the stun­ning dis­con­nect between physi­cians’ and patients’ under­stand­ing of a procedure’s value.
The study, pub­lished in the Sept 7th Annals of Inter­nal Med­i­cine, used sur­vey meth­ods to eval­u­ate 153 car­di­ol­ogy patients’ under­stand­ing of the poten­tial ben­e­fit of per­cu­ta­neous coro­nary inter­ven­tion (PCI or angio­plasty). The inves­ti­ga­tors, at Baystate Med­ical Cen­ter in Mass­a­chu­setts, com­pared patients’ responses to those of car­di­ol­o­gists who obtained con­sent and who per­formed the pro­ce­dure. As out­lined in the article’s intro­duc­tion, PCI reduces heart attacks in patients wi...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4214108</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 2010 17:00:42 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4214108</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Medical Journals Have Their Own Conflicts Of Interest</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4125283&amp;cid=t_130677_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2Fz4r5rINz09I%2F</link>
            <description>Much attention has been paid to conflicts of interest relating to the pharmaceutical industry, but where do medical journals fit in this equation? A new study notes that journals also have vested interests that warrant disclosure. Specifically, industry-supported clinical trials can boost a journal&amp;#8217;s so-called impact factor by generating greater distribution of reprints that increase citation rates and, of course, revenue. The trials are often supported by drugmakers, which purchase reprints.
What is an impact factor? The researchers defined it this way: a measure of a journal&amp;#8217;s importance based on how often its articles are cited. This is not just about prestige, of course, but the potential for greater circulation (there is a formula contained in the study, which was publishe...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4125283</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Nov 2010 12:41:53 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4125283</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Progressive Healthcare Rationing: What Will It Look Like?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4125010&amp;cid=t_130677_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fprogressive-healthcare-rationing-what-will-it-look-like%2F2010.11.01</link>
            <description>In prior posts, DrRich introduced his readers to Ezekiel Emanuel, M.D., Ph.D., brother of Rahm, eminent medical ethicist, and one of the White House’s chief advisers on healthcare policy. Dr. Emanuel was one of the authors of that recent paper in the Annals of Internal Medicine which admonished American physicians that resistance is futile. He has also famously called upon American physicians to abandon the obsolete medical ethics expressed in the Hippocratic Oath.
The reason the ideas (and pronouncements) of Dr. Emanuel are important is that he presumably will be a major “decider” in determining who will serve on the GOD panels, and how those panels will operate to advance his (and Mr. Obama’s) program of healthcare reform.
So, before we leave Dr. Emanuel to his important duties, ...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4125010</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 01 Nov 2010 12:00:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4125010</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Patients Starved For Time With The Doctor</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3954259&amp;cid=t_130677_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fpatients-starved-for-time-with-the-doctor%2F2010.09.09</link>
            <description>If you’re into health care consumerism, you&amp;#8217;ll enjoy my guest blog post at CDHC Solutions magazine. CDHC Solutions focuses on consumer-driven health plans. Consumer-driven plans are a form of “high deductible” health coverage that is more popular than ever. For whatever you want to say about these plans, one thing is clear: They don’t solve the fundamental problem of patients not having enough time with their doctors.
Here’s a taste of what I wrote:
Researchers have been trying to pinpoint the impact of this time starvation on the quality of medical care, and they’re finding disturbing results. A recent study in the Annals of Internal Medicine found that because of time pressures and related factors, doctors deliver “error-free” care as rarely as 22 percent of the ti...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3954259</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 19:00:36 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3954259</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Young Doctors Who Lie</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3858156&amp;cid=t_130677_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fyoung-doctors-who-lie%2F2010.08.11</link>
            <description>This is something: A study published in the July 20, 2010 Annals of Internal Medicine finds that 5 percent of residency applications contain plagiarized content. The study from Boston’s Brigham &amp; Woman’s Hospital is based on the personal statements of nearly 5,000 residency applicants that were matched against a database of published content.
The authors comment that the study is limited, among other things, by the fact that it was done in just one institution. It makes me wonder if the number is artificially high or potentially too low.
So why would medical students lie? (more&amp;#8230;)

			
			*This blog post was originally published at 33 Charts* (Source: Better Health)</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3858156</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 11 Aug 2010 18:00:14 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3858156</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>When Diagnosing, Doctors Often Ignore Patients’ Social Factors</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3833426&amp;cid=t_130677_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fwhen-diagnosing-doctors-often-ignore-patients-social-factors%2F2010.08.07</link>
            <description>A recent study from the Annals of Internal Medicine found that doctors often discounted a patient’s social situation when making a medical diagnosis.
Lead researcher Saul Weiner “arranged to send actors playing patients into physicians’ offices and discovered that errors occurred in 78 percent of cases when socioeconomic concerns were a significant factor.”
Evan Falchuk, commenting on the results, provides some context:
It’s hard to expect even the most gifted clinician, trying to make it through yet another week of a hundred or more patient encounters, to get these difficult decisions right. Too much of the context of a patient’s care gets lost in the endless churn of patient visits that the health care system imposes on doctors.I suspect this is enormously frustrating for doc...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3833426</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 07 Aug 2010 12:00:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3833426</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Industry Funded Clinical Trials &amp; Biased Publication</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3816758&amp;cid=t_130677_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2FmShjsSO3yyM%2F</link>
            <description>A new study finds that clinical trials funded by the pharmaceutical industry are more likely to report a positive outcome, but less likely to be published shortly after completion than trials funded by other sources, such as the federal government, non-profit groups or academia. Unlike previous studies on this topic, the researchers say their study broadens the debate because they made a point of examining 546 trials that were registered on ClinicalTrials.gov and involved five widely used classes of meds for treating depression, high cholesterol, high blood pressure, heartburn and schizophrenia.
All of the trials occurred between 2000 and 2006. The study, which was published in The Annals of Internal Medicine, found 346 trials, or 63 percent, were primarily funded by industry, 74 or 14 per...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3816758</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 03 Aug 2010 14:50:41 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3816758</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Report Shows Most Industry-Sponsored Medical Research Finds (Surprise) Positive Benefits</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3816331&amp;cid=t_130677_83_f&amp;fid=34856&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Finsidesurgery.com%2F2010%2F08%2Freport-shows-industrysponsored-medical-research-finds-surprise-positive-benefits%2F</link>
            <description>Dr. Kenneth Mandl and colleagues at Childrens Hospital in Boston have published a report in Annals of Internal Medicine showing that the overwhelming majority of industry-sponsored medical research finds results that would financially benefit the sponsoring industry. (Source: Inside Surgery)</description>
            <author>Inside Surgery</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3816331</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 03 Aug 2010 13:38:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3816331</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>How Error-Free Is Your Doctor’s Care?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3812978&amp;cid=t_130677_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fhow-error-free-is-your-doctors-care%2F2010.08.02</link>
            <description>According to the Annals of Internal Medicine, doctors make the wrong medical decisions surprisingly often.
Using a “mystery patient” technique –- in which actors pretended to be patients –- researchers found that doctors made errors in complicated cases in 60 percent to 90 percent of cases. Sixty to ninety percent. In uncomplicated cases, they made errors in nearly 30 percent of cases.
As one study participant put it, “I was shocked.”
The study took place over three years, and included more than 100 doctors in six Chicago-area hospitals. The doctors had agreed to participate in a study on medical decision making, but had no idea that they might see a patient who was actually an actor. The actors recorded their conversations with the doctors. (more&amp;#8230;)

			
			*This bl...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3812978</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 02 Aug 2010 16:00:06 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3812978</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>“Social Mission”: A Primary Care Score For Medical Schools</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3714188&amp;cid=t_130677_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fsocial-mission-a-primary-care-score-for-medical-schools%2F2010.06.30</link>
            <description>Medical schools are traditionally ranked on criteria like research funding and technological innovation. These rankings are highly significant. A place on the U.S. News‘ annual &amp;#8220;Best Medical School&amp;#8221; list  is a coveted spot indeed.
So that’s why there was some media attention paid to a recent study from the Annals of Internal Medicine, which ranked medical schools according to their “social mission” — a phrase that defines a school’s commitment to primary care, underserved populations and workforce diversity. Using this new criterion, some of the traditionally high ranking schools fell significantly. (more&amp;#8230;)

			
			*This blog post was originally published at KevinMD.com* (Source: Better Health)</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3714188</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2010 12:00:17 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3714188</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Medical Schools: Why Do Some Do Primary Care Better?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3690838&amp;cid=t_130677_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fmedical-schools-why-do-some-do-primary-care-better%2F2010.06.23</link>
            <description>A new study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, ACP&amp;#8217;s flagship journal, finds that medical schools vary greatly in producing more primary care physicians and getting them into underserved communities.
- &amp;#8220;Public schools graduate higher proportions of primary care physicians&amp;#8221; than private schools.
- &amp;#8220;The 3 historically black colleges and universities with medical schools (Morehouse College, Meharry Medical College, and Howard University) score at the top&amp;#8221; in training primary care physicians who then go on to practice in underserved communities. (Click here for an interview with two recent graduates of historically black colleges and with Wayne Riley, MD, FACP, who is the president and CEO of Meharry Medical College in Nashville, Tennessee and a regent ...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3690838</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2010 18:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3690838</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Unnecessary Tests And Treatments: Responsible Reporting Can Help</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3662674&amp;cid=t_130677_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Funnecessary-tests-and-treatments-responsible-reporting-can-help%2F2010.06.14</link>
            <description>Just when I’ve lost hope that mainstream media will stop perpetuating the myth the more medicine equals better care, the Associated Press came up with this excellent piece. The article states, rightly, that “anywhere from one-fifth to nearly one-third of the tests and treatments we get are estimated to be unnecessary,” and that, “it may lead to dangerous side effects.”
Regular readers of this blog should be familiar with those concepts. I wrote recently that patients often reject evidence-based medicine. One reason is that there aren&amp;#8217;t enough clinical guidelines available for patients to make an informed decision. (more&amp;#8230;)

			
			*This blog post was originally published at KevinMD.com* (Source: Better Health)</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3662674</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:00:37 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3662674</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Go To A Famous Hospital, Get Better Care?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3526741&amp;cid=t_130677_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fgo-to-a-famous-hospital-get-better-care%2F2010.05.03</link>
            <description>Hospital rankings matter.
Specifically, those published in the U.S. News &amp; World Report carry additional weight. Hospitals use these numbers in advertising campaigns, and patients often choose hospitals based on these rankings.
But does a high place really mean you’re getting better care? Not necessarily. (more&amp;#8230;)

			
			*This blog post was originally published at KevinMD.com* (Source: Better Health)</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3526741</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 03 May 2010 16:00:24 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3526741</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>#FollowFriday #FF the EBM-Skeptics @cochranecollab @EvidenceMatters @oracknows @ACPinternists</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3035869&amp;cid=t_130677_86_f&amp;fid=38272&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Flaikaspoetnik.wordpress.com%2F2009%2F11%2F27%2Ffollowfriday-ff-the-ebm-skeptics-cochranecollab-evidencematters-oracknows-acpinternists%2F</link>
            <description>FollowFriday is a twitter tradition in which twitter users recommend other users to follow (on Friday) by twittering their name(s), the hashtags #FF or #FollowFriday, and the reason for their recommendation(s).
Since the roll out of Twitter lists I add the #FollowFriday Recommendations to a (semi-)permanent #FollowFriday Twitter list: @laikas/followfridays-ff
This week I have added 4 people to [...] (Source: Laika's MedLibLog)</description>
            <author>Laika's MedLibLog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3035869</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 22:54:01 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3035869</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Merck Wants It Both Ways With Study Author?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1782897&amp;cid=t_130677_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F387682768%2F</link>
            <description>Last month, a group of doctors published a report in the Annals of Internal Medicine that labeled a Vioxx study known as Advantage as a seeding study, a reference to a trial that is actually conducted for marketing purposes, rather than prove a scientific point.
In response, Jonathan Edelman, executive director at Merck&amp;#8217;s research labs, published an open letter in which he chastised the authors for failing to reach out to the drugmaker. &amp;#8220;It is unfortunate that the authors and journal editors chose not to contact Merck before finalizing these publications. Had any of these individuals contacted Merck, factual errors could have been avoided,&amp;#8221; he wrote. (Back story).
However, in an August 22 e-mail to Merck lawyer Ted Mayer, one of the JAMA authors, Brown University&amp;#8217;s ...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1782897</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 13:52:09 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1782897</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Next Fight Over Avandia Is Under Way</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=786020&amp;cid=t_130677_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F141742484%2F</link>
            <description>Now that the FDA panel has decided Glaxo&amp;#8217;s diabetes drug can stay on the market - but with unspecified warnings and restrictions - the drugmaker has an opportunity to blunt any further damage. And so what better way to do so than to throw darts at the study that caused the ruckus in the first place?
That study, of course, was the recent meta-analysis published in The New England Journal of Medicine by Steve Nissen, the controversial Cleveland Clinic cardiologist, who found that Avandia increased the risk of a heart attack by 43 percent. Despite criticism that a meta-analysis can have limitations, Nissen continues to argue its a good way to assess safety. 
Today, though, Glaxo sent e-mails to the media touting the conclusion of a new study published in The Annals of Internal Medicine ...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=786020</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 07 Aug 2007 21:11:06 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">786020</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Selenium elevates Type 2 diabetes risk</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=725114&amp;cid=t_130677_87_f&amp;fid=34867&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thediabetesblog.com%2F2007%2F07%2F10%2Fselenium-elevates-type-2-diabetes-risk%2F</link>
            <description>Filed under: Type 2, Diet, Drugs, Research, Daily NewsA new study has shown that taking selenium supplements elevates the risk of Type 2 diabetes. Around twelve hundred participants were involved in the study. Some took 200 micrograms of selenium daily, while others got a placebo. After nearly eight years had gone by, the researchers found that those taking the selenium were at an increased risk of nearly fifty percent for Type 2 diabetes.The finding raises the question: does supplementation of the diet with bottled vitamin pills or fortified food products do as much, or possibly even more, harm than good? The Washington Post contains quotes from both Larry Deeb of the American Diabetes Association and Eliseo Guallar of Johns Hopkins University expressing concern at Americans' propensity f...</description>
            <author>The Diabetes Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=725114</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jul 2007 04:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">725114</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Chondroitin wonand#8217;t help you against arthritis pain</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=874678&amp;cid=t_130677_129_f&amp;fid=36191&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.arthritisblog.org</link>
            <description>Anupam: 	Arthritis patients, using dietary supplement chondroitin to relieve joint pain may be using it in vain because it is no better than a placebo for reducing pain. 
	Study, conducted by the Swiss researchers that published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, came out promulgating this fact after reviewing data from 20 clinical trials, which tracked more than 3,846 patients. During the course of study, experts found no evidence, showing chondroitin effective against osteoarthritis. This finding stands head to head to the assumption, under whose impel chondroitin is considered quite effective against osteoarthritis. Chondroitin is generally combined with glucosamine, which is also a supplement. 
	Interestingly, experts found no side effects in using this combination (chondroitin/glucos...</description>
            <author>Arthritis Blog</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=874678</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2007 12:38:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">874678</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

