3 ms·
FTA> There have definitely been several studies that have shown that women are slower to be diagnosed, and that might be explained by the fact that women are mo
by darkerside 8y ago
FTA> There have definitely been several studies that have shown that women are slower to be diagnosed, and that might be explained by the fact that women are more likely to have ‘atypical’ symptoms
Also FTA> Female doctors are more likely to speak with their patients longer and provide more evidence-based care than their male colleagues... This could help them to pick up on heart attacks, even if women have more atypical symptoms.
Seems like women have a naturally higher likelihood of dying from heart attack. This is offset by a higher likelihood of methodical individual care (perhaps at cost of speed) if the doctor happens to be female.
- whatshisface 8y ago>This is offset by a higher likelihood of methodical individual care (perhaps at cost of speed) if the doctor happens to be female. Then why wouldn't the female doctors provide better care for the men as well? The study concluded that the female-female match was better off, not that women were better doctors than men overall.
- darkerside 8y agoBecause heart attacks in men are typically more straightforward to diagnose. In women they often require additional diagnostic effort, which coincidentally female doctors are more likely to undertake.