It was with some weariness that I read the article by Gordon J.D. Cochrane, “Physicians and their primary relationships: How to be successful in both personal and professional realms” [BCMJ 2019;61:208-211]. I understood the author’s concern that physicians may drag their doctor-patient communication methods home, causing stress and conflict and thus interfering with the intimate level of communication needed in primary relationships. My first problem with the article was the implication that the physician should be living in two spheres: be the best when at work as a doctor and be the best when in his (or presumably in her) primary relationship. Easier said than done, and besides, perhaps the partner enjoys being a doctor’s husband or a doctor’s wife, with all the imperfections. Reading on, my second problem was that the article was based on the results of a study of long-term relationships of only 57 supposedly happy nonphysician couples. In that study the factors cited to achieve success at home included commitment, love and trust, good communication, effective problem solving, similar views and values, enthusiasm for life with a sense of humor, and sexual intimacy. All I could say was, amen. Actually, I rather liked the helpful suggestions relating to the last item, but think of the performance anxiety trying to excel in all the recommended factors. My third problem with the article was more personal: I am not a fan of generalized behavioral advice. This article had all the good intentions of providing specific assistance in the home relationships of busy doctors, but I couldn’t help but imagine Clark Kent changing out of his Superman costume (or Superwoman changing out of her costume) when arriving home after a day’s work.
—George Szasz, CM, MD
This letter was submitted in response to “Physicians and their primary relationships: How to be successful in both personal and professional realms.”
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