Delineating (and delimiting) the boundary spanning role of the medical public information officer |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Journalism Department, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, 429 Davis Hall, Indiana, PA 15705, USA;2. School of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27514, USA;1. Department of Physiology, National Cheng Kung University College of Medicine, Tainan 70101, Taiwan, ROC;2. Department of Health Psychology, Chang Jung Christian University, Tainan 71101, Taiwan, ROC;3. Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, National Cheng Kung University College of Medicine, Tainan 70101, Taiwan, ROC;1. ESECS, Polytechnic Institute of Leiria, 2411–901 Leiria, Portugal;2. Center for Research and Development in Mathematics and Applications (CIDMA), Department of Mathematics, University of Aveiro, 3810–193 Aveiro, Portugal;1. Karelian Institute, University of Eastern Finland, 80101 Joensuu, Finland;2. Centre for Research on Complexity (Ce.R.Co.), University of Bergamo, 24129 Bergamo, Italy;3. MEMOTEF, La Sapienza-Unversitá di Roma, 00185 Roma, Italy;4. Leibniz Institute for Research on Society and Space, 15537 Erkner, Germany;5. Departament d’Humanitats, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, 08005 Barcelona, Spain;6. GRITIM (Political Science Department), Universitat Pompeu Fabra, 08002 Barcelona, Spain |
| |
| Abstract: | Medical public information officers serve as boundary spanners between medical experts and journalists. Editors at every daily newspaper in Pennsylvania and cardiac surgeons in Pennsylvania were surveyed about the role of medical PIOs. While the two groups expressed many similar opinions, editors generally were more open to medical PIOs as boundary spanners, whereas surgeons preferred to handle their own media relations. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
