1916: A Global History

The mud-filled, blood-soaked trenches of the Low Countries and North-Eastern Europe were essential battlegrounds during the First World War, but the war reached many other corners of the globe, and events elsewhere significantly affected its course.

Covering the twelve months of 1916, eminent historian Keith Jeffery uses twelve moments from a range of locations and shows how they reverberated around the world. As well as discussing better-known battles such as Gallipoli, Verdun and the Somme, Jeffery examines Dublin, for the Easter Rising, East Africa, the Italian front, Central Asia and Russia, where the killing of Rasputin exposed the internal political weakness of the country's empire. And, in charting a wide range of wartime experience, he studies the 'intelligence war', naval engagements at Jutland and elsewhere, as well as the political consequences that ensued from the momentous US presidential election.

Using an extraordinary range of military, social and cultural sources, and relating the individual experiences on the ground to wider developments, these are the stories lost to history, the conflicts that spread beyond the sphere of Europe and the moments that transformed the war. - See more at: http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/1916-9781408834305/#sthash.axFq0psR.dpuf

"Should I prioritize medical problem solving or attentive listening?": the dilemmas and challenges that medical students experience when learning to conduct consultations

Objective: Communication skills can be trained alongside clinical reasoning, history taking or clinical examination skills. This is advocated as a solution to the low transfer of communication skills. Still, students have to integrate the knowledge/skills acquired during different curriculum parts in patient consultations at some point. How do medical students experience these integrated consultations within a simulated environment and in real practice when dealing with responsibility?

Methods: Six focus groups were conducted with (pre-)/clerkship students.

Results: Students were motivated to practice integrated consultations with simulated patients and felt like 'real physicians'. However, their focus on medical problem solving drew attention away from improving their communication skills. Responsibility for real patients triggered students' identity development. This identity formation guided the development of an own consultation style, a process that was hampered by conflicting demands of role models.

Conclusion: Practicing complete consultations results in the dilemma of prioritizing medical problem solving above attention for patient communication. Integrated consultation training advances this dilemma to the pre-clerkship period. During clerkships this dilemma is heightened because real patients trigger empathy and responsibility, which invites students to define their role as doctor.

Practice Implications: When training integrated consultations, educators should pay attention to students' learning priorities and support the development of students' professional identity.

Validity of a personal and family history of cataract and cataract surgery in genetic studies.

PURPOSE:

To determine the accuracy of a history of cataract and cataract surgery (self-report and for a sibling), and to determine which demographic, cognitive, and medical factors are predictive of an accurate history.

METHODS:

All participants in the Salisbury Eye Evaluation (SEE) project and their locally resident siblings were questioned about a personal and family history of cataract or cataract surgery. Lens grading at the slit lamp, using standardized photographs and a grading system, was performed for both SEE participants (probands) and their siblings. Cognitive testing and a history of systemic comorbidities were also obtained for all probands.

RESULTS:

Sensitivity of a history of cataract provided on behalf of a sibling was 32%, specificity 98%. The performance was better for a history of cataract surgery: sensitivity 90%, specificity 89%. For self-report of cataract, sensitivity was also low at 55%, with specificity at 77%. Self-report of cataract surgery gave a much better performance: sensitivity 94%, specificity 100%. Different cutoffs in the definition of cataract had little impact. Factors predicting a correct history of cataract included high school or greater education in the proband (odds ratio [OR] = 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI]1.02-1.25) and younger sibling (but not proband) age (OR = 0.94 for each year of age, 95% CI 0.90-0.99). Gender, race and Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE) result were not predictive.

CONCLUSIONS:

Whereas accurate self and family histories for cataract surgery may be obtainable, it is difficult to ascertain cataract status accurately from history alone.