Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorApgar, Daviden
dc.contributor.advisorArmstrong, Edwarden
dc.contributor.authorDesamero, Xiera
dc.contributor.authorDo, Hieu
dc.contributor.authorLiu, Bo
dc.contributor.authorApgar, David
dc.contributor.authorArmstrong, Edward
dc.date.accessioned2016-06-24T15:24:22Z
dc.date.available2016-06-24T15:24:22Z
dc.date.issued2011
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/614602
dc.descriptionClass of 2011 Abstracten
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the level of accuracy in terms of medical information presented in the popular television show, House, MD. This is part of a larger ongoing study, and evaluates only the first 11 episodes of season four. METHODS: This study was a descriptive, retrospective assessment of the first 11 episodes in the fourth season of the medical television drama, House, MD. The signs and symptoms, diagnostic procedures, and medical treatment for one major disease portrayed in each episode were recorded and compared to authoritative medical sources. Based on the medical resource material used, an accuracy score for each of the three above-mentioned variables in each episode was assigned. Three researchers evaluated these ratings individually. A collaborative rating was determined for all three variables for all eleven episodes. RESULTS: The average accuracy scores for presenting signs and symptoms, diagnostic procedures, and medical treatments were 2.36, 1.82, and 1.91, respectively. The average accuracy score across the three variables resulted in a rating of 2.03. Episode one was excluded from the final analysis. The one-way ANOVA, Tukey’s HSD test and the Kruskal Wallis test all found no significant difference among the data. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not excluded in this analysis. CONCLUSION: The presenting symptoms, diagnostic procedures, and medical treatments shown in the eleven episodes evaluated were not significantly different in terms of level of accuracy. The average accuracy score of the eleven episodes indicated that the information presented was correct but somewhat unusual.
dc.language.isoen_USen
dc.publisherThe University of Arizona.en
dc.rightsCopyright © is held by the author.en
dc.subjectHouse M.D.en
dc.subjectTelevision showen
dc.subjectFourth Seasonen
dc.subjectAccuracyen
dc.subject.meshTelevision
dc.subject.meshDiagnosis
dc.titleThe Level of Accuracy in the Fourth Season of the Medical Television Drama, House M.D.en_US
dc.typetexten
dc.typeElectronic Reporten
dc.contributor.departmentCollege of Pharmacy, The University of Arizonaen
dc.description.collectioninformationThis item is part of the Pharmacy Student Research Projects collection, made available by the College of Pharmacy and the University Libraries at the University of Arizona. For more information about items in this collection, please contact Jennifer Martin, Associate Librarian and Clinical Instructor, Pharmacy Practice and Science, jenmartin@email.arizona.edu.en
html.description.abstractOBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the level of accuracy in terms of medical information presented in the popular television show, House, MD. This is part of a larger ongoing study, and evaluates only the first 11 episodes of season four. METHODS: This study was a descriptive, retrospective assessment of the first 11 episodes in the fourth season of the medical television drama, House, MD. The signs and symptoms, diagnostic procedures, and medical treatment for one major disease portrayed in each episode were recorded and compared to authoritative medical sources. Based on the medical resource material used, an accuracy score for each of the three above-mentioned variables in each episode was assigned. Three researchers evaluated these ratings individually. A collaborative rating was determined for all three variables for all eleven episodes. RESULTS: The average accuracy scores for presenting signs and symptoms, diagnostic procedures, and medical treatments were 2.36, 1.82, and 1.91, respectively. The average accuracy score across the three variables resulted in a rating of 2.03. Episode one was excluded from the final analysis. The one-way ANOVA, Tukey’s HSD test and the Kruskal Wallis test all found no significant difference among the data. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not excluded in this analysis. CONCLUSION: The presenting symptoms, diagnostic procedures, and medical treatments shown in the eleven episodes evaluated were not significantly different in terms of level of accuracy. The average accuracy score of the eleven episodes indicated that the information presented was correct but somewhat unusual.


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record