[When is a doctor a good doctor? An analysis of the contents of statements by representatives of the medical profession ].
BACKGROUND
Several professional bodies have developed influential documents which have tried to describe the essential competences of a good doctor. Such an initiative has not been previously conducted in German-speaking countries. Differences between the published statements point towards the significance of differences in the respective sociocultural setting.


METHODS
The first step was to take advantage of a series of standardized written interviews [including the item "What makes a doctor a good doctor?"], conducted with leading German physicians and published serially in the Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift. Responses were qualitatively analysed by three assessors in accordance with Grounded Theory. Text fragmentation and assignment of categories was built successively: it was based on the actual material and repeatedly revised.


RESULTS
261 statements were extracted from a total of 83 interviews. It was possible to assign 249 of them to one of the following nine categories: "knowledge", "empathy" and "patient orientation" and, less frequently "practical competence", "genuineness", "helper", "awareness of limits", "life-long learning" and "cooperation". Results were similar for older and younger physicians, or when comparing representatives of clinical and theoretical disciplines.


CONCLUSIONS
It will be worthwhile to survey and evaluate the opinion of additional members of the medical profession and of patients and others with a stake in the health system--comparing and delineating results from different countries--so that a more comprehensive picture can be drawn of "the good doctor".
Herzig
S
S
Institut für Pharmakologie, Klinikum der Universität zu Köln. stefan.herzig@uni-koeln.de
Biehl
L
L
Stelberg
H
H
Hick
C
C
Schmeisser
N
N
Koerfer
A
A
D005858:Germany; D006801:Humans; D007407:Interviews as Topic; D010506:Periodicals as Topic; D010820:Physicians / Q000592:standards*