Creativity in clinical research is alive and well in Canadian family practice. Do we know it when we see it?;La créativité en recherche clinique est en pleine é bullition en pratique familiale canadienne. La reconnaissons-nous quand nous la voyons?

Canadian Family Physician

Volumn 50, Issue SEP., 2004, Pages 1194-1203

  McWhinney, I R ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

^b Ctr for Studies in Family Medicine   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANADA; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL STUDY; EDITORIAL; FAMILY MEDICINE; GENERAL PRACTICE; HUMAN; MEDICAL PROFESSION; PATIENT CARE; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; VALIDATION PROCESS;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; CANADA; CREATIVENESS; FAMILY PRACTICE; HUMANS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 4644353031     PISSN: 0008350X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Editorial

References (9)

1. McWhinney IR, Why are we doing so little clinical research? Part 1: clinical descriptive research. Can Fam Physician 2001;47:1702-2 (Eng), 1713-5 (Fr).
2. McWhinney IR. Why are we doing so little clinical research? Part 2: why clinical research is neglected. Can Fam Physician 2001;47:1994-6 (Eng), 1952-5 (Fr).
3. Ryle J. The physician as naturalist. In: Ryle J. The natural history of disease. London, Engl: Oxford University Press; 1936. p. 1-23.
4. Kuhn TS. The structure of scientific revolutions. 2nd ed. Chicago, Ill, University of Chicago Press; 1970.
5. Koestler A. The act of creation. London, Engl: Pan Books Ltd; 1970.
6. Murphy G, Ballou RO, editors. William James on psychical research. London, Engl: Chatto & Windus; 1961.
7. Hoffer LJ. Complementary or alternative medicine: the need for plausibility. CMAJ 2003;168(2):180-2.
8. Bagratuni L. Prognosis in the anarthritic rheumatoid syndrome. BMJ 1963;1:513-8.
9. Malterud K. The issue of validity regarding the contents of consultations. Scand J Prim Health Care 1993;11(Suppl 2):64-7.