Another of my varied medically related interests includes bringing top-notch quality medical services wherever they are needed.
Paul Farmer is a medical anthropologist who is working on making better medical care available in Haiti, and I saw this neat episode of PBS’s Nature. How can we get antivenins where they are needed?
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/episodes/black-mamba/introduction/5260/ “Black Mambas” video
Clinic in a Can: http://www.clinicinacan.org/
Global Impact Charity Parners
Improving the Quality of Care in developing countries http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK11790/
Partners in Health http://www.pih.org/
Harvard’s biography of Paul Farmer http://ghsm.hms.harvard.edu/people/faculty/paul-farmer
So what do you think? What suggestions do you have for improving medical services realistically and economically?
P.S.S.S. What do you think medical records will look like in just a few years from now?
I can imagine doctors using their phones and tablets more and more, because that’s just been the trend in the general population.
P.S.S.S.S. Do you think people will have more electronic access to their health records? My mom used to have a little book where she kept our shot records
To be able to pick books that our patrons will need and actually use, we actually have to get to know them. (Shocker, right?)
There are also lists that can help us, with suggested books. (But you can also look on Publisher websites and these publishers might tweet about new books.
I don’t think publishers are going to work together much though, to put their information about similar subjects together so that people could find it easily.
The website that Dr. MacCall showed us that let you see two different textbooks side by side was really cool.
How can we help people become more health literate, ’cause that’s important.
Dervin, Brenda. “Libraries reaching out with health information to vulnerable populations: guidance from research on information seeking and use.” Journal of the Medical Library Association 93.4 (2005) : S74-S80. Web. 2 June 2014.
Brenda Dervin, in this article, discusses similarities and differences between library science and communication. In the communication field, people study was to broadcast a message, to get others to pay attention to it, and hopefully persuade them to change their practices. Of course we have a message, but people don’t necessarily just passively listen and absorb the message, they might react. Library scientists, a bit more altruistically, on the other hand, examine people’s information needs, how they look for answers, and how information can best be ordered to find it again, as needed. With regards to communication, if the person composing or broadcasting the message is arrogant or condescending, people aren’t going to respond well. An important thing to look at then, for communicationists, is do messages actually get people to change how they behave, and what about a message actually gets people to do this (most effective practices). On page S76, she remarks that people are more likely to listen up and do something if they can see similarities between themselves and the recomendees (a listener might think why should I listen to this person? Does he or she actually understand and/or care about my life? Does what he or she is talking about actually affect me at all?); and sometimes people broadcasting the message might make bad assumptions, and that can’t really help get a message across. Also, on page S76, Dervin notes that people realize that something somebody with expertise might say today could be totally bashed by somebody else, and tend to distrust establishments more and more. She suggests, we should treat a message more as a dialog, than just thinking somebody passively will soak up a message. Dervin also notes that somebody without familiarity with a subject doesn’t have the same protection as sombody steeped in the necessary knowledge and understanding. And sometimes people might need more than information, no matter its importance (Dervin, S77).
Carlisle Cullen is a character created by Stephenie Meyer, from her Twilight Saga. He’s a vampire; born in London, his human life lasted from about the 1640’s to the 1660’s.Changed into a vampire in his 20’s, he decides against tradition vampirism to become “vegetarian” (only preying on animals.) Eventually, he moves to the United States, and finds the rest of the Cullens. Now, you may question “What does this have to do with medical libraries?” The answer is, after becoming a vampire, he decides to become a doctor, not exactly what you would expect. One thing that intrigues me about this character is if he would be real, just imagine all the history he would have seen. He would have seen everything we talked about in class happen. He would have seen American medicine at it’s very beginnings. He would have seen the science take over, and Flexner’s report, and modern medicine as well.
The fictional character Gilbert Blythe, created by Lucy Maude Montgomery, according to the book Anne of Green Gables’s World would have been born in the 1870’s, I think, on Prince Edward Island. He would have grown up going to a one room school house. We sort of see what college was like for Anne in Anne of the Island, but we don’t get to see much what college and med school were like for Gilbert. Would he have heard of Flexner’s report? He would be practicing at the start of medicine as we see it today. His son Jem would have seen medicine even more modernized, but not quite there yet. Jem would have been middle aged when antibiotics were introduced, but they would maybe have heard about x-rays. What would practicing medicine on a small island like PEI have been like?
Someday, I would like to write a companion book or books from Gilbert and Jem’s perspectives about their lives and being doctors
End of ramble.
P.S. twilightlexicon.com, and The Twilight Saga Official Illustrated Guide are good for more background info on characters – a recovering twihard
Any statement sounds so much more dramatic if you add “in space” to the end of it. So, of course I would think about more areas that I would like to research. (That’s not a bad thing though, right?) In the last few years, I’ve become interested in Space, and from work, I’ve heard about doing health sciences experiments in Space.
Here are some cool links that I found this morning.
Hodges, Brian. “The many and conflicting histories of medical education in Canada and the USA: an introduction to the paradigm wars.” Medical Education 39 (2005): 613-621. Web. 31 May 2014.
Hodges aims to get a better view of what medical education actually was and is like. For the early days of medical education in English-speaking North America, there is not much actual primary source writing to look at. Most doctors received their training as apprentices. He also notes that most doctors who had studied at a university mostly stayed back in Europe. Hodge remarks that 3 different authors writing about this time-frame describe it very differently, focusing on different aspects. For example, one author zooms in on the deplorable state of training and the superstitions. Another author looks at these early doctors’ heroism. And yet another author depicts doctors from the 1600’s ‘til the early 1800’s as capitalist businessmen. Hodge notes that at certain points, all of these could apply, but only partially; one author’s view doesn’t tell the whole story. Authors discussing the next historical period with regards to medical education often gush about improvement, while others focus on eliteism or certain people groups; one might write about women and their struggles to receive training and become doctors. But according to Hodges, each author tends to highlight one particular people group, ending up with a somewhat one-sided view. Flexner’s report resulted in some medical schools for women having to close. Hodges points out that when people talk about Flexner’s report, they often highlight how it greatly helped increase the quality of medical education because the majority of bad schools wouldn’t operate any more, yet they tend to forget that Flexner’s report resulted in disenfranchisement of women and others (such as Jewish or African American people) from medical education for many years. Hodges also mentions sociologists, and how they bring a new, needed perspective on medical education, and one of his main points is that we should not try to transendentalize or quest for “universal truths”
Hi, Evelyn Lukey here.
I signed up for this class (LS 534) because someday, I would like to work at USAMRIID (with all those nasty Biosafety Level 4 viruses (among many various other dreams). In fact, I did my LibGuide for 507 on the Ebola Virus http://bama-slis.libguides.com/content.php?pid=574967&sid=4740857. So I guess, these are some of my first steps on the road to actually doing that…
P.S. Midwifery and forensic anthropology are some of my medical interests, and I was wondering if forensic anthropologists ever use medical libraries.
P.S.S. During the spring semester of 2011, I took a medical anthropology class. And one of the things we talked about (which I thought was really cool) was ethnobotany- people going out and studying how different groups use plants from their surroundings, especially with regards to maybe finding new medicines.
P.S.S.S. I love foreign languages, so if anybody finds things about medical librarianship, especially in French, please send it my way.
P.S.S.S.S. I also think an interesting area of study for medical librarians is how we could use robots more to help in hospitals, and for homebound people who are sick. (I got involved with robotics at work and this Time special edition magazine http://www.amazon.com/Time-Rise-Robots-Neil-Fine/dp/B00DT72PT0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1401571248&sr=8-1&keywords=time+rise+of+the+robots and NASA’s 2012 Spinoff book also got me thinking about this.
Final P.S. And one thing that I think would be neat to do is take the library (story time and games like checkers and chess, etc., and just visiting too) to hospitals, for both kids and adults.