Re: Making family med attractive

Issue: BCMJ, vol. 44 , No. 5 , June 2002 , Pages 230 Letters

I read with interest Dr G. Henderson’s comments [in BCMJ 2002;44(3):116] regarding my President’s message in the January edition of the BC College of Family Physicians’ newsletter. I am sorry he does not share my views. I am convinced that much of the increasing dissatisfaction being experienced these days by our profession is due to at least a partial loss of that altruistic tendency that has accompanied the practice of medicine in years past.

Don’t get me wrong. Most physicians work hard, take responsibility for a high level of care, and deserve appropriate financial reward. The real pity is that we are not paid for doing what we do best—caring for the chronically ill, counseling those who are troubled, delivering babies, sorting out complicated problems—rather than the short, self-limiting illnesses we churn through so we can pay our overhead!

My point is that our reward is not only financial. I also am a so-called full-service family physician. I also work in an after-hours clinic, our local answer to after-hours care, run by local full-service family physicians. Although the financial rewards surpass my office practice, I far prefer to work out of my office. Why? Because I know my patients. We have developed a relationship over many years of visits. Some of the relationships are not my first choice for friendship, but I have come to know their quirks and foibles and can better interpret their complaints in that context. In the context of that relationship, I have an impact on their lives. And that is rewarding. Without this “altruistic” component, this becomes just another job that I, for one, would not enjoy. And we all know how people fare in life when their job is a burden!

—Susan Knoll, MD
President, BCCFP

Susan Knoll, MD. Re: Making family med attractive. BCMJ, Vol. 44, No. 5, June, 2002, Page(s) 230 - Letters.



Above is the information needed to cite this article in your paper or presentation. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommends the following citation style, which is the now nearly universally accepted citation style for scientific papers:
Halpern SD, Ubel PA, Caplan AL, Marion DW, Palmer AM, Schiding JK, et al. Solid-organ transplantation in HIV-infected patients. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:284-7.

About the ICMJE and citation styles

The ICMJE is small group of editors of general medical journals who first met informally in Vancouver, British Columbia, in 1978 to establish guidelines for the format of manuscripts submitted to their journals. The group became known as the Vancouver Group. Its requirements for manuscripts, including formats for bibliographic references developed by the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM), were first published in 1979. The Vancouver Group expanded and evolved into the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), which meets annually. The ICMJE created the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals to help authors and editors create and distribute accurate, clear, easily accessible reports of biomedical studies.

An alternate version of ICMJE style is to additionally list the month an issue number, but since most journals use continuous pagination, the shorter form provides sufficient information to locate the reference. The NLM now lists all authors.

BCMJ standard citation style is a slight modification of the ICMJE/NLM style, as follows:

  • Only the first three authors are listed, followed by "et al."
  • There is no period after the journal name.
  • Page numbers are not abbreviated.


For more information on the ICMJE Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals, visit www.icmje.org

BCMJ Guidelines for Authors

Leave a Reply