Taking osteopathic distinctiveness seriously: Historical and philosophical perspectives

Journal of the American Osteopathic Association

Volumn 105, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 241-244

  Osborn, Gerald G ^a,b  

^a TRUMAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Northeast Missouri Health Network   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL PRACTICE; HISTORY OF MEDICINE; HUMAN; MANIPULATIVE MEDICINE; MEDICAL LITERATURE; PHILOSOPHY; REVIEW;

HISTORY, 19TH CENTURY; HISTORY, 20TH CENTURY; HUMANS; OSTEOPATHIC MEDICINE; PHILOSOPHY, MEDICAL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 23244466593     PISSN: 00986151     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (17)

1. Sirica CM. Session IV: Future Directions for Osteopathic Medicine. Sirica CM, ed. Osteopathic Medicine Past Present, and Future: Proceedings of a Conference Chaired by D Kay Clawson, MD, Dallas, Texas, 10-12 March 1995. New York, NY: Josiah Macy Jr Foundation; 1996:139-176.
2. Starr P. The Social Transformation of American Medicine. Philadelphia, Pa: Basic Books; 1982.
3. Watter GW. The First School of Osteopathic Medicine: A Chronicle. Kirksville, Mo: Thomas Jefferson University Press; 1992.
4. Chesney AM. The Johns Hopkins Hospital and The Johns Hopkins University Medical School: A Chronicle. 1893-1905. Vol 1. Baltimore, Md: The Johns Hopkins University Press; 1943.
5. Gevitz N. The challenge of distinctiveness. The DOs. Osteopathic Medicine in America. 2nd ed. Baltimore, Md: The Johns Hopkins University Press; 2004:171-191.
6. Osborn GG. The beginning: nineteenth century medical sectarianism. In Gallagher RM, Humphrey FJ 2nd, Micozzi MS, eds. Osteopathic Medicine: A Reformation in Progress. Edinburgh, Scotland: Churchill Livingstone; 2001:3-25.
7. Still AT. Autobiography of A.T. Still [e-book]. 1897.
8. Electronic library: early American manual therapy page. Meridian Institute: Monterey, Calif; 2004. Available at http://www.meridianinstitute.com/ eamt/files/still3/st3cont.html. Accessed May 12, 2005.
9. Rogers FJ, D'Alonzo GE Jr, Glover JC, Korr IM, Osborn GG, Patterson MM, et al Proposed tenets of osteopathic medicine and principles for patient care. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2002;102:63-65. Available at: http://www. jaoa.org/cgi/reprint/102/2/63. Accessed May 25, 2005.
10. Hulett GD. A Text Book of the Principles of Osteopathy. 5th ed. Pasadena, Calif: A.T. Still Research Institute; 1922.
11. Interpretation of osteopathic concept prepared by committee at Kirskville. Designed for use toward more effective teaching throughout curriculum, (report to Board of Trustees for Kirksville College of Osteopathy and Surgery, Morris Thompson, President, June 1952). J Osteopathy. 1953;60:7.
12. Special Committee on Osteopathic Principles and Osteopathic Technic (sic), Kirksville College of Osteopathy and Surgery. An interpretation of the osteopathic concept. Tentative formulation of a teaching guide for faculty, hospital staff and student body. J Osteopathy. 1953;60:8-10.
13. Anderson RN, Smith BL Deaths: leading causes for 2002. Natl Vital Stat Rep. March 7, 2005;53:1-89. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/ nvsr53/nvsr53_17.pdf. Accessed May 31, 2005.
14. Booth FW, Neufer PD. Exercise controls gene expression. Amer Sci. January-February 2005;93:28-35.
15. Murray CJL, Lopez AD. The Global Burden of Disease: A Comprehensive Assessment of Mortality and Disability from Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors in 1990 and Projected to 2020. Vol 1. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press; 1996.
16. Carey TS, Motyka TM, Garrett JM, Keller RB. Do osteopathic physicians differ in patient interaction from allopathic physicians? An empirically derived approach. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2003;103:313-318. Available at: http://www.jaoa.org/cgi/reprint/103/7/313. Accessed June 14, 2005.
17. Howell JD. The paradox of osteopathy. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:1465-1468. Extract available at: http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/341/19/1465. Accessed May 25, 2005.