Silver G A
Yale J Biol Med. 1984 Nov-Dec;57(6):851-64.
Social medicine as a term has achieved acceptance in medical education and medical practice, although there is still some question as to its acceptance in reality. The term had its origin in the vigorous nineteenth-century efforts at both medical and social reform, combining the two in a recognition of the intimate connection between social factors and the causation of disease. Henry Ernest Sigerist, a Swiss physician and noted scholar of medical history, formulated the broadest concept in the 1930s, attracting students and a latent American reform movement toward the idea of restructuring medical education as one part of social reform, and indicating ways of restructuring medical practice as another element in improving medical care at the same time. In addition to promulgating the doctrine, he established the policy of examining and describing systems of medical education and medical care in other parts of the world, not only to assist in improving medical care in countries with well-organized systems, but to assist countries with poor resources and lesser organizational capability in meeting the goals of social medicine. Doubt as to the durability of the concept has been expressed, insofar as the recommended improvements have lagged behind the expression, and because so many changes have taken place in the nature of medical practice, medical discoveries, and advances in technology. A closer examination of Sigerist's writings on the subject and evaluation of the circumstances around present-day problems would seem to indicate that the flaw is not in the doctrine, but in the lack of social application.
“社会医学”这个术语在医学教育和医疗实践中已被认可,尽管在实际应用中仍存在一些问题。该术语起源于19世纪医学和社会改革的蓬勃发展,将两者结合起来,认识到社会因素与疾病成因之间的密切联系。亨利·欧内斯特·西格里斯是一位瑞士医生,也是著名的医学史学者,他在20世纪30年代提出了最宽泛的概念,吸引了学生以及美国一场潜在的改革运动,这场运动旨在将医学教育改革作为社会改革的一部分,并指出了改革医疗实践的方法,以此作为改善医疗服务的另一个要素。除了宣扬这一学说,他还制定了一项政策,即考察和描述世界其他地区的医学教育和医疗体系,这不仅有助于改善医疗体系完善国家的医疗服务,还能帮助资源匮乏、组织能力较弱的国家实现社会医学的目标。有人对这一概念的持久性表示怀疑,因为所建议的改进措施滞后于表述,而且医疗实践的性质、医学发现和技术进步都发生了如此多的变化。仔细研究西格里斯关于这个主题的著作,并评估当今问题的相关情况,似乎可以表明问题不在于学说本身,而在于缺乏社会应用。