HOW PHYSICIANS JUDGE SYMPTOM STATEMENTS

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Psychiatrists and nonpsychiatrists from Mexico and the USA scaled the seriousness of the symptom items that make up the Midtown Mental Health Questionnaire. Each physician was asked to assess the symptoms in either a male or female patient and to assume that he had encountered the symptom during the course of a clinical evaluation. All 3 variables[long dash]physician type, nationality and gender[long dash]showed significant effects on some symptoms, and 2 clear trends emerged. Psychiatrists of each nation judged a number of symptoms to be "more serious" than did nonpsychiatrists of the same nation. The 2 American physician groups scaled several items higher than did equivalent Mexican physical groups. Gender appeared to be a significant variable in the Mexican psychiatry group. A possible gender difference was suggested in the American nonpsychiatry subgroup. In each case males received higher symptom scores. This study illustrates some of the conceptual and methodological biases that may be present in cross-cultural psychiatric studies that use structured symptom questionnaires.

This publication has 3 references indexed in Scilit: