<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Midweek Medicine: The importance of review</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.tsuken.co.nz/midweek-medicine-the-importance-of-review/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.tsuken.co.nz/midweek-medicine-the-importance-of-review/</link>
	<description>Ramblings (and music) of a guitar-playing shrink</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 15 Jan 2012 15:13:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: Allen Fraser</title>
		<link>http://www.tsuken.co.nz/midweek-medicine-the-importance-of-review/comment-page-1/#comment-73</link>
		<dc:creator>Allen Fraser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Dec 2009 18:49:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tsuken.co.nz/?p=663#comment-73</guid>
		<description>There is of course no logic in presuming that the first person to evaluate a person&#039;s signs and symptoms will always (a) get all relevant information and (b) interpret the data appropriately. It is even less logical to deny the probability that more time and information may assist in reaching a correct diagnosis. It has always bewildered me that there is this seeming claim that when two clinicians disagree about diagnosis the one who made the first diagnosis is right. I think your comment about wounded pride has some validity, and might almost be more acceptable than what I suspect really drives this attitude; intellectual laziness. And when added to that is the tendency to blame the patient when they don&#039;t get better (non compliance, drug use, personality disorder et al), is it any wonder that I get a message left on the office phone at 0130 saying that psychiatrists are cheats. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is of course no logic in presuming that the first person to evaluate a person&#039;s signs and symptoms will always (a) get all relevant information and (b) interpret the data appropriately. It is even less logical to deny the probability that more time and information may assist in reaching a correct diagnosis. It has always bewildered me that there is this seeming claim that when two clinicians disagree about diagnosis the one who made the first diagnosis is right. I think your comment about wounded pride has some validity, and might almost be more acceptable than what I suspect really drives this attitude; intellectual laziness. And when added to that is the tendency to blame the patient when they don&#039;t get better (non compliance, drug use, personality disorder et al), is it any wonder that I get a message left on the office phone at 0130 saying that psychiatrists are cheats.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

