It is a common human characteristic to seek that which is new and to believe in new things without subjecting them to the criticisms which are advanced against older facts. Medical literature teems with instances in which medical men have been carried away by their enthusiasm over methods of diagnosis or treatment which experience has proved to possess no advantages, but rather disadvantages, over more well-tried measures. This desire for the new, however, is responsible for many of the advances which have been made, for were all men satisfied with that which they possess, seekers after additional facts would be few.
During the last few years the profession has been more or less carried away by the tendency to resort to laboratory methods of diagnosis, 1, because many of these are associated with the new science of bacteriology, and 2, because the results obtained have seemed more scientifically accurate and
LABORATORY INVESTIGATION AND ITS EFFECT ON CLINICAL DIAGNOSIS. JAMA. 1900;XXXV(26):1679. doi:10.1001/jama.1900.02460520011002
Coronavirus Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: