2018
DOI: 10.1002/cdq.12124
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Using the Delphi Method to Classify Medical Specialties

Abstract: One medical specialty classification system applicable for research and career counseling is the person‐oriented versus technique‐oriented taxonomy. Given that the model was conceptualized in the 1960s, verification based on how medical specialties are practiced and viewed today is necessary. Five specialists in medical career development and advising verified the categorization of specialties. Based on their review, 100% consensus was reached regarding grouping of specialties. This outcome validates the taxon… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The three groups for analysis were the commonly used “person-oriented” and “technique-oriented” specialties (Zeldow et al, 1990) in addition to general practice (GP) (details shown in Table 3). This is based on a taxonomy from the 1960s, and, although the role of physicians has inevitably changed since then, a recent review found a consensus with these groupings in current physicians (Borges & Richard, 2018). However, this taxonomy determines specialties based on treatment approach rather than by social interaction.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The three groups for analysis were the commonly used “person-oriented” and “technique-oriented” specialties (Zeldow et al, 1990) in addition to general practice (GP) (details shown in Table 3). This is based on a taxonomy from the 1960s, and, although the role of physicians has inevitably changed since then, a recent review found a consensus with these groupings in current physicians (Borges & Richard, 2018). However, this taxonomy determines specialties based on treatment approach rather than by social interaction.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Specialty analysis was limited to the cohorts of 2016 and 2017 since later cohorts had not yet started further training and education. For this analysis, medical specialties were grouped as General Practitioners (GP), Person-oriented Specialties (PS: internal medicine, gynecology, physical medicine and rehabilitation, pediatrics and psychiatry), and Technique-oriented Specialties (TS: surgery, neuro-surgery, orthopedic surgery, esthetical surgery, otolaryngology, ophthalmology, anesthesiology, dermatology, emergency medicine, pathology, radiography, insurance medicine, clinical biology, clinical genetics, nuclear medicine, urology and stomatology) [ 34 ].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%