Female students in dissection room

Dissection room for female students, called hen medics, first floor of the Anatomical Laboratory. The women had separate dissection rooms until 1908 (source: Not Just Any Medical School by Horace W. Davenport.)

Addresses and other papers,

The early history of practical anatomy.--The history of the Philadelphia school of anatomy and its relation to medical teaching.--Our recent debts to vivisection.--Recent progress in surgery.--The new era in medicine and its demands upon the profession and the college.--The real rewards of medicine.--Medicine as a career for educated men.--Vivisection and brain surgery.--Medical education.--The advantages of an academic training for a medical career.--Literary methods in medicine.--Address at the unveiling of the statue of the late Prof. Samuel D. Gross, M.D.--Semicentennial address in surgery before the American medical association.--The debt of the public to the medical profession.--The endowment of medical colleges.--The ideal physician.--Address at the Royal college of surgeons of England at the conferring of honorary degrees at the centenary celebration of the granting of its present charter.--The progress of surgery in the nineteenth century.--The mission of a medical college.--The duties and responsibilities of trustees of public medical institutions.--The qualities essential to success in medicine.--The cheerfulness of death.--The need for increased endowments for medical instruction.--Age and youth in medicine.--Surgical reminiscences of the civil war.

Report of the Federal Security Agency :

Index for 1867-1907 issued as the Office's Bulletin no. 407.

Special report series /

Some nos. issued in revised editions.

Public Law 94-437 Title I scholarship programs : health professions preparatory, health professions pregraduate, health professions /

Mode of access: Internet.

Farmer's bulletin.

Mode of access: Internet.

Report on secondary schools and pupil-teacher centres (existing conditions). With introductory notes.

Mode of access: Internet.

Collected papers of the Mayo Clinic and the Mayo Foundation.

Mode of access: Internet.

Proceedings

1973 not published

What is the Impact of the Underserved Pathway program on Entering an Underserved Family Medicine Residency? A Comparison of Three Approaches for Estimating the Average Treatment Effect

Thesis (Master's)--University of Washington, 2016-06

Influences on doctors' prescribing: Is geographical remoteness a factor?

Objective: To identify factors influencing the prescribing of medicines by general practitioners in rural and remote Australia. Design: A qualitative study using a questionnaire to determine attitudes about prescribing, specific prescribing habits and comments on prescribing in ‘rural practice’. Setting: General practice in rural and remote Queensland. Subjects: General practitioners practising in rural and remote settings in Queensland (n = 258). Main outcome measures: The factors perceived to influence the prescribing of medicines by medical practitioners in rural environments. Results: A 58% response rate (n = 142) was achieved. Most respondents agreed that they prescribe differently in rural compared with city practice. The majority of respondents agreed that their prescribing was influenced by practice location, isolation of patient home location, limited diagnostic testing and increased drug monitoring. Location issues and other issues were more likely to be identified as ‘influential’ by the more isolated practitioners. Factors such as access to continuing medical education and specialists were confirmed as having an influence on prescribing. The prescribing of recently marketed drugs was more likely by doctors practising in less remote rural areas. Conclusion: Practising in rural and remote locations is perceived to have an effect on prescribing. These influences need to be considered when developing quality use of medicines policies and initiatives for these locations. What is already known: Anecdotal and audit based studies have shown that rural general practice differs to urban-based practice in Australia, including some limited data showing some variations in prescribing patterns. No substantiated explanations for these variations have been offered. It is known that interventions to change prescribing behaviour are more likely to be effective if they are perceived as relevant and hence increasing our knowledge of rural doctors’ perceptions of differences in rural practice prescribing is required. What this study adds: Rural doctors believed that they prescribe differently in rural compared with city practice and they described a range of influences. The more remotely located doctors were more likely to report the ‘rural’ influences on prescribing, however, most results failed to reach statistical significance when compared to the less remotely located doctors. These perceptions should be considered when developing medicines policy and education for rural medical practitioners to ensure it is perceived rurally relevant.

Panoptic versus conventional ophthalmoscope

Background: The 'ease of use' andaccuracy in measurement of the vertical optic cup/discratio (VCDR) was compared between the conventional direct ophthalmoscope(CO) and Panoptic direct ophthalmoscope (PO) in a group of 'naive' firstyear medical students to determine which would be more suitablefor non-ophthalmologists. Methods: In this quasi-randomized method comparison study,eight students received an introductory session on ophthalmoscopythen examined 18 eyes (9 left, 9 right) with each ophthalmoscopein a private practice. The subjects were the eight students themselvesplus two other subjects. Each subject (n = 10)had one eye dilated. Students determined a VCDR and a subjectivescore of 'ease of use' on a scale of 1 (difficult)to 10 (easy). A consultant ophthalmologist (GAG) determined thebenchmark VCDR for each eye with each ophthalmoscope. Results: Of 288 eye examinations, there were 111 measure-ments of VCDR using the CO (47 undilated, 64dilated), and 140 measurements using the PO (75 undilated, 65 dilated).Differences in the students' estimated VCDR and the benchmarkwere similar for the CO and PO (P = 0.67). 'Easeof use' was scored in 288 eyes and the median score washigher in the PO overall (CO: median 8, IQR 6-9; PO median9, IQR 8-10; P < 0.0001), andwithin each session (P < 0.0001 foreach session). Conclusions: Medical students found the PO mucheasier to use, with accuracy of rating the VCDR similar to the CO. Thiscomparison would support the wider use of the PO amongst medicalstudents, general practitioners and other primary care providers.