Elliott, Prof. Paul, (born 21 April 1954), Professor of Epidemiology and Public Health Medicine, since 1995 and Head, Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, School of Public Health (formerly Division of Primary Care and Population Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine), since 1998, Imperial College London

2007 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 36
Author(s):  
M. L. Russell ◽  
L. McIntyre

We compared the work settings and “community-oriented clinical practice” of Community Medicine (CM) specialists and family physicians/general practitioners (FP). We conducted secondary data analysis of the 2004 National Physician Survey (NPS) to examine main work setting and clinical activity reported by 154 CM (40% of eligible CM in Canada) and 11,041 FP (36% of eligible FP in Canada). Text data from the specialist questionnaire related to “most common conditions that you treat” were extracted from the Master database for CM specialists, and subjected to thematic analysis and coded. CM specialists were more likely than FP to engage in “community medicine/public health” (59.7% vs 15.3%); while the opposite was found for primary care (13% vs. 78.2%). CM specialists were less likely to indicate a main work setting of private office/clinic/community health centre/community hospital than were FP (13.6% vs. 75.6%). Forty-five percent of CM provided a response to “most common conditions treated” with the remainder either leaving the item blank or indicating that they did not treat individual patients. The most frequently named conditions in rank order were: psychiatric disorders; public health program/activity; respiratory problems; hypertension; and metabolic disorders (diabetes). There is some overlap in the professional activities and work settings of CM specialists and FP. The “most commonly treated conditions” suggest that some CM specialists may be practicing primary care as part of the Royal College career path of “community-oriented clinical practice.” However the “most commonly treated conditions” do not specifically indicate an orientation of that practice towards “an emphasis on health promotion and disease prevention” as also specified by the Royal College for that CM career path. This raises questions about the appropriateness of the current training requirements and career paths as delineated for CM specialists by the Royal College of Physicians & Surgeons of Canada. Bhopal R. Public health medicine and primary health care: convergent, divergent, or parallel paths? J Epidemiol Community Health 1995; 49:113-6. Pettersen BJ, Johnsen R. More physicians in public health: less public health work? Scan J Public Health 2005; 33:91-8. Stanwell-Smith R. Public health medicine in transition. J Royal Society of Medicine 2001; 94(7):319-21.


Author(s):  
J. Lloyd Michener ◽  
Brian C. Castrucci ◽  
Don W. Bradley ◽  
Edward L. Hunter ◽  
Craig W. Thomas

Chapter 1 provides an introduction to the history and background to a general desire to try to find ways to improve population health through primary care and public health. The first Practical Playbook derived from an internet-based initiative that sought to find, assemble, assess, and share stories of how communities and agencies across the United States were working together to improve health. This text is the second development from that, after the realization that a completely new text was needed that would build on the experiences of the broadening array of sites and sectors and provide a concise set of tools, methods, and examples that support multi-sector partnerships to improve population health. The chapter then outlines the coverage of the rest of the chapters.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document