Search

This paper reviews the author's experience in becoming a medical sociologist before the field had become formalized. The contributions to medical sociology of sociologist Selden D. Bacon and physician and medical educator William R. Willard are described. The relationship of medical sociology to medical behavioral science, as experienced at the University of Kentucky, is discussed. Finally, the thesis of the author's 1957 paper on the nature and status of medical sociology is re-examined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The introduction to this special issue of the Journal expands the scope of research on "the sociology of medical education" to include studies of the institutions in which physicians are trained as well as studies of the socialization of the physician throughout the life cycle. Research since the 1960s is reviewed briefly and the papers in this issue are discussed. Studies of the macropolitics and micropolitics of academic medicine are called for as well as comparative analyses of the settings in which physicians are trained and research on the relative effects on physicians' attitudes and behavior of different sets of experiences, professional and nonprofessional, over the course of their life cycle-all in the context of massive changes in the organization of health care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is a revision of the address given upon receipt of the Leo G. Reeder Award for distinguished Scholarship in Medical Sociology. It was presented on August 19, 1987 to the Medical Sociology Section of the American Sociological Association during its annual meeting held in Chicago. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper develops and tests a model of the health services delivery system based on an examination of the interrelationships among patient and provider variables (treated as exogenous) and access, utilization, continuity, quality, and satisfaction with medical care services (treated as endogenous). The model is tested using data collected from 106 hypertension patients enrolled in the Seattle Prepaid Health Care Project during the period February 1, 1971, through June 30, 1973. Several findings of both sociological and public policy interest emerged. Perceived access to care was among the most important predictors of patient satisfaction: patients from larger families were less satisfied with their care and experienced poorer outcomes of care; patients receiving care from independent fee-for-service practitioners experienced better outcomes than patients receiving care from prepaid group practice providers, even though the latter met a higher percentage of indicated criteria for care; and there was no relationship between perceived access to care and annualized visits. Several important interaction effects involving the nature of the provider system were predicted and supported by the data. The findings are viewed as a first step in the development of a "middle-range" theory of health services delivery systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study, we question (1) whether the relationship between unemployment and mental healthcare use, controlling for mental health status, varies across European countries and (2) whether these differences are patterned by a combination of unemployment and healthcare generosity. We hypothesize that medicalization of unemployment is stronger in countries where a low level of unemployment generosity is combined with a high level of healthcare generosity. A subsample of 36,306 working-age respondents from rounds 64.4 (2005-2006) and 73.2 (2010) of the cross-national survey Eurobarometer was used. Country-specific logistic regression and multilevel analyses, controlling for public disability spending, changes in government spending, economic capacity, and unemployment rate, were performed. We find that unemployment is medicalized, at least to some degree, in the majority of the 24 nations surveyed. Moreover, the medicalization of unemployment varies substantially across countries, corresponding to the combination of the level of unemployment and of healthcare generosity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A central sociological premise is that health care systems are organizations that are embedded within larger institutions, which have been shaped by historical precedents and operate within a specific cultural context. Although bound by policy legacies, embedded constituencies, and path dependent processes, health care systems are not rigid, static, and impervious to change. The success of health care reform in 2010 has shown that existing regimes do have the capacity to respond to new needs in ways that transcend their institutional and ideological limits. For the United States the question is how health care reform will reconfigure the existing network of public and private benefits and the power relationships between the numerous constituencies surrounding them. This article considers how institutions, interest groups, and ideology have affected the organization of the health care system in the United States as well as in other nations. It then discusses issues for future research in the aftermath of the 2009-10 health care reform debate. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The current situation in health care organizations, among providers and for people, dramatically challenges the "business as usual" roles of medicine, government, insurance companies, the community, and the university. Health care reform marks the first attempt in a century to consider a reconstruction of the social contract between society and medicine. While sociology stands as one of the earliest social sciences to systematically study the health care arena and create a health-focused subfield, there is a perception, not without support, of a desertion of identity from within, an encroachment by other areas from without, and abandonment by the parent discipline. We argue that these situations in medical arenas and in research fields require serious rethinking. The key lies in understanding how these phenomena are related to each other and to larger social forces, and how they offer opportunities, rather than signal limitations, to medical sociologists. We turn to the theoretical tools of sociology to help unravel the complicated challenges that face both policymakers and researchers. After framing these issues in a sociology of knowledge perspective, we use the case of "utilization theory" to illustrate the connections between society and systems of care (as well as studies of them) and to create a future agenda. We end by raising three basic questions: (1) Why is a sociological perspective critical to the understanding of change and reform in health care? (2) Why is medical sociology critical to the survival of the general sociological enterprise? and (3) Why is general sociology critical to the research agenda in medical sociology? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article provides an overview of the contribution of sociologists to the study of racial and ethnic inequalities in health in the United States. It argues that sociologists have made four principal contributions. First, they have challenged and problematized the biological understanding of race. Second, they have emphasized the primacy of social structure and context as determinants of racial differences in disease. Third, they have contributed to our understanding of the multiple ways in which racism affects health. Finally, sociologists have enhanced our understanding of the ways in which migration history and status can affect health. Sociological insights on racial disparities in health have important implications for the development of effective approaches to improve health and reduce health inequities. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

A pressing concern in contemporary health policy is whether the medical profession’s mandate to take care of clients has been undermined by the influx of money into health care. We examine the medical profession’s transformation over the past decades. First, we review how sociologists have viewed the medical profession over the past half-century as one stakeholder among other stakeholders vying for market share and power in the health care field.We then examine three recent challenges to the profession that exemplify the tension between self-interest and collective altruism to act in the best interest of patients: (1) the rise of patient consumerism, (2) the advent of evidence-based medicine, and (3) the increasing power of the pharmaceutical industry. We show the resilience of the medical profession as it adapts and transforms in response to these challenges. We conclude with implications to help inform policy makers’ assessments of how the medical profession will react to policy initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]