2,262
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

‘Good’ and ‘bad’ doctors - a qualitative study of the Austrian public on the elements of professional medical identity

ORCID Icon, , & ORCID Icon
Article: 2114133 | Received 01 Jun 2022, Accepted 11 Aug 2022, Published online: 24 Aug 2022

Figures & data

Table 1. Sampling distribution characteristics; 2020 good doctor survey.

Table 2. Sample selected characteristics (n = 1,000); 2020 good doctor survey.

Figure 1. Categories for ‘good’ doctors by 1000 Austrians: distribution of answers through the seven main categories.

Figure 1. Categories for ‘good’ doctors by 1000 Austrians: distribution of answers through the seven main categories.

Figure 2. Categories for ‘bad’ doctors by 1000 Austrians: distribution of answers through the seven main categories.

Figure 2. Categories for ‘bad’ doctors by 1000 Austrians: distribution of answers through the seven main categories.

Table 3. Definition of the categories.

Table 4. Main categories and subthemes of ‘social skills’ for a good doctor.

Table 5. Main categories and subthemes of ‘professional competence’ for a good doctor.

Table 6. Main categories of ‘personality’ for a good doctor.

Table 7. Main categories and subthemes of ‘communication’ for a good doctor.

Table 8. Main categories and subthemes of ‘practice organization’ for a good doctor.

Table 9. Main categories and subthemes of ‘ethical and moral behavior’ for a good doctor.

Table 10. Main categories and subthemes of ‘social skills’ for a bad doctor.

Table 11. Main categories and subthemes of ‘professional competence’ for a bad doctor.

Table 12. Main categories of ‘personality’ for a bad doctor.

Table 13. Main categories and subthemes of ‘ethical and moral behavior’ for a bad doctor.

Table 14. Main categories and subthemes of ‘communication’ for a bad doctor.

Table 15. Main categories and subthemes of ‘practice organization’ for a bad doctor.