a NIH article about difference between DO and MD

[Jinyaoysiu]

Let's not start another DOvsMD battle here. Just want to show people what's going on in the real world and that there are people doing research like this. Take it with a grain of salt. I personally found it to be interesting to read.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...ve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12884943&dopt=Abstract

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[U4iA]

interesting post...

 

[normalforce]

I am a DO, and of course, think that there is some mild validity to the study. However, the sample size was probably too small to make it valid. In my clinic experience, MD and DO interaction with pts is quite similar. The variance is more in clinician personality versus type of training.

NF

But it is nice to see DOs recognized and not shown as inferior.

 

[BamaAlum]

Man, I really wish they wouldn't publish studies like this. What does it accomplish? If it were published in a journal that MD's actually read it would probably prompt a massive reciprocal response. I can envision the multiple studies produced by the MD's to demostrate that their interaction with patients and their methods are superior. In the end, neither study would result in better care provided to the patients. Unfortunately, the JAOA is riddled with similar publications which is why it is lining many garbage cans across America.

 

[PublicHealth]

This is not an "NIH article" as you stated. It's an (obviously biased) article that was published in the Journal of the American Osteopathic Association and made available through pubmed.

 

[brianjc]

Being an osteopathic student (MS2) and having recieved the JAOA for the last year now, you can pretty much reguard most of the research (not all I said most) in it as complete bull****.

 

[jhug]

If it were published in a journal that MD's actually read it would probably prompt a massive reciprocal response

you mean that md's don't like us to tell them how much better we are???
that doesn't improve health care? 🙄
personally, i would take no attention over this type of attention...it's embarrasing
hopefully with some new blood eventually in the aoa, we'll get off our soapbox and start being physicians...

 

[Boomer]

This is not an "NIH article" as you stated. It's an (obviously biased) article that was published in the Journal of the American Osteopathic Association and made available through pubmed.

Yeah, but it did come from an allopathic school, and, if I recall, the lead author is an MD.

 

[docbill]

Let's not start another DOvsMD battle here. Just want to show people what's going on in the real world and that there are people doing research like this. Take it with a grain of salt. I personally found it to be interesting to read.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...ve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12884943&dopt=Abstract

I like the study.. and would not be surprised if this information is correct.

The number is really small. They should do about 1000 random patients in a single state or big city.

It is not NIH study.. where did you read that.