The case of Dr. Oz: Ethics, evidence, and does professional self-regulation work?

11Citations
Citations of this article
28Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Dr. Mehmet Oz is widely known not just as a successful media personality donning the title “America's Doctor ® ,” but, we suggest, also as a physician visibly out of step with his profession. A recent, unsuccessful attempt to censure Dr. Oz raises the issue of whether the medical profession can effectively self-regulate at all. It also raises concern that the medical profession's self-regulation might be selectively activated, perhaps only when the subject of professional censure has achieved a level of public visibility. We argue here that the medical profession must look at itself with a healthy dose of self-doubt about whether it has sufficient knowledge of or handle on the less visible Dr. “Ozes” quietly operating under the profession's presumptive endorsement.

References Powered by Scopus

Why Most Clinical Research Is Not Useful

434Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Varieties of healing. 1: Medical pluralism in the United States

122Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Televised medical talk shows - What they recommend and the evidence to support their recommendations: A prospective observational study

67Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Protecting consumers from fraudulent health claims: A taxonomy of psychological drivers, interventions, barriers, and treatments

46Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Key opinion leaders — a critical perspective

38Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

How Dr Google Is Impacting Parental Medical Decision Making

29Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Tilburt, J. C., Allyse, M., & Hafferty, F. W. (2017). The case of Dr. Oz: Ethics, evidence, and does professional self-regulation work? AMA Journal of Ethics, 19(2), 199–206. https://doi.org/10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.2.msoc1-1702

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 5

45%

Professor / Associate Prof. 4

36%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

9%

Researcher 1

9%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 7

58%

Nursing and Health Professions 3

25%

Philosophy 1

8%

Neuroscience 1

8%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
Blog Mentions: 5
News Mentions: 48
References: 1
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 2204

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free