"HE USED TO BE A LATE TALKER” : PARENTS’ NARRATION OF A FIVE YEAR OLD CHILD NAMED HASAN

This narrative inquiry is based on the lived experiences of parents who have a speech delayed child. A child with a language delay must go through in order to appropriately have strong competence in the language learning process. The data were derived from parents’ stories, a speech therapy progress book, medical records, and video recordings of classroom activities. Findings were focused on the thorough process a research subject has undergone to finally survive in catching up his lag of language development compared to the mainstream children of his age. After four years of intensive labor requiring parental involvement and three years of programmed therapy, the research subject achieves improvement milestones that enable him to catch up to conventional children's language development, which he should have completed. More research into the deployment of other linguistic aspects is needed to provide a clear picture of the development of his language learning.

Application Of Tongqiao Huoxue Decoction In The Treatment Of Cerebrovascular Disease : A Review

TongqiaoHuoxue Decoction (TONGQIAO HUOXUE DECOCTION) originated from the book "Medical Forest Correction" written by Wang Qingren in 1830. It is a prescription for activating blood circulation and dispersing stagnation, mainly for the faculties of the head and face. With more than one hundred years of clinical and experimental exploration by Chinese medicine researchers, the connotation of TONGQIAO HUOXUE DECOCTION has been enriched and developed. It can be used to treat many diseases, but it still focuses on head and face related diseases, especially cerebrovascular diseases. By collecting and sorting out the relevant literature on TONGQIAO HUOXUE DECOCTION, we systematically report the latest knowledge about TONGQIAO HUOXUE DECOCTION, mainly including the application of TONGQIAO HUOXUE DECOCTION in the treatment of cerebrovascular diseases and their secondary diseases.

In defense of undeservedly accused and offended medical doctors: “Medical Doctor’s Rights”, а 3rd edition review

Currently, a number of court hearings regarding potential crimes in delivering health-care services have been exponentially increased. Some of them receive publicity and launch public debates, but many more of those stay beyond the information field. A number of medical doctors are targeted in the investigation as defendants and sentence to actual jail time. Numerous medical workers envisioning a threat to their professional carrier, and even freedom, may now avoid of risky manipulations and interventions, which may eventually negatively affect patient’s prognosis. In such situation, increasing awareness about rights of medical workers acquires special relevance. In the mean time, professional publications dedicated to this topic are sharply demanded that might be useful and written in plain Russian. Among them, it may be highlighted a book “Medical Doctor’s Rights”, by A.A. Ponkina and I.V. Ponkin thoroughly elucidating professional rights and providing tools necessary for their defense. Although we believe that it’s scarcely describes causes, real-life cases it is excusable for this otherwise brilliant book. We recommend it for careful examination both for law enforcement officers involved in such lawsuits and a wide audience of healthcare workers as well as medical students.

Emergence and Evidence: A Close Look at Bunge’s Philosophy of Medicine

In his book “Medical Philosophy: Conceptual issues in Medicine”, Mario Bunge provides a unique account of medical philosophy that is deeply rooted in a realist ontology he calls “systemism”. According to systemism, the world consists of systems and their parts, and systems possess emergent properties that their parts lack. Events within systems may form causes and effects that are constantly conjoined via particular mechanisms. Bunge supports the views of the evidence-based medicine movement that randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide the best evidence to establish the truth of causal hypothesis; in fact, he argues that only RCTs have this ability. Here, we argue that Bunge neglects the important feature of patients being open systems which are in steady interaction with their environment. We show that accepting this feature leads to counter-intuitive consequences for his account of medical hypothesis testing. In particular, we point out that (i) the confirmation of hypotheses is inherently stochastic and affords a probabilistic account of both confirmation and evidence which we provide here; (ii) RCTs are neither necessary nor sufficient to establish the truth of a causal claim; (iii) testing of causal hypotheses requires taking into account background knowledge and the context within which an intervention is applied. We conclude that there is no “best” research methodology in medicine, but that different methodologies should coexist in a complementary fashion.