Search tips
Search criteria

Results 1-2 (2)

Clipboard (0)

Select a Filter Below

Year of Publication
Document Types
1.  The views of doctors on their working lives: a qualitative study 
To describe doctors' views on, and responses to, their professional working lives in the UK National Health Service (NHS).
Qualitative study using semi structured interviews.
Two district hospitals and primary care settings in the North of England.
Fifty-two doctors participated in the study – 47 worked in hospital and five worked in general practice.
Main outcome measures
Qualitative information regarding doctors' views on their working lives.
The study provided insights into the views of their working lives of a sample of doctors in the NHS. Feelings they articulated contained a number of ambivalences. Feelings about the future were coloured by concerns about the impact of regulatory changes and processes of modernization on the experiential knowledge of doctors.
These insights into doctors' views of their working lives might usefully inform those involved in the planning and overseeing of changes to health service structures and systems.
PMCID: PMC2625381  PMID: 19092029
2.  Reliability of Health Information on the Internet: An Examination of Experts' Ratings 
The use of medical experts in rating the content of health-related sites on the Internet has flourished in recent years. In this research, it has been common practice to use a single medical expert to rate the content of the Web sites. In many cases, the expert has rated the Internet health information as poor, and even potentially dangerous. However, one problem with this approach is that there is no guarantee that other medical experts will rate the sites in a similar manner.
The aim was to assess the reliability of medical experts' judgments of threads in an Internet newsgroup related to a common disease. A secondary aim was to show the limitations of commonly-used statistics for measuring reliability (eg, kappa).
The participants in this study were 5 medical doctors, who worked in a specialist unit dedicated to the treatment of the disease. They each rated the information contained in newsgroup threads using a 6-point scale designed by the experts themselves. Their ratings were analyzed for reliability using a number of statistics: Cohen's kappa, gamma, Kendall's W, and Cronbach's alpha.
Reliability was absent for ratings of questions, and low for ratings of responses. The various measures of reliability used gave conflicting results. No measure produced high reliability.
The medical experts showed a low agreement when rating the postings from the newsgroup. Hence, it is important to test inter-rater reliability in research assessing the accuracy and quality of health-related information on the Internet. A discussion of the different measures of agreement that could be used reveals that the choice of statistic can be problematic. It is therefore important to consider the assumptions underlying a measure of reliability before using it. Often, more than one measure will be needed for "triangulation" purposes.
PMCID: PMC1761929  PMID: 11956034
Newsgroup; Internet; rating information; reliability; reproducibility of results; statistics; quality control

Results 1-2 (2)