Data resources from Case No. 28 to datasets of millions.

J. Ferrie

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/IJE/DYS224

IF: 9.685

2012-12-01

International Journal of Epidemiology

Abstract:Our Reprints and Reflections section in this issue of the IJE presents a paper by Sir James Mackenzie, first published in the BMJ in 1921. In it Mackenzie expounds the benefits for medical progress of meticulous observation and record keeping by the general practitioner. This treatise on the importance of tracking early signs and symptoms initially in the relatively healthy and studying their development over time is acknowledged to have laid the foundations of academic research in general practice. It also clearly establishes the primacy of general practice in establishing disease aetiology and prevalence, particularly in populations with high levels of co-morbidity. Our commentators on Mackenzie’s paper all highlight the folly of his diatribes against specialists, technology and laboratory based methods, whose judicious espousal might have aided his cause. However, in different ways they also emphasize the importance of his work and its influence and relevance today. Based in the Mackenzie Building at the University of Dundee, Blair Smith and colleagues remind us that Mackenzie’s belief that disease prevention is the most important focus of research was key to the establishment of this principle at the heart of public health and epidemiology. Richard Baker points out that much remains to be gained from the application of Mackenzie’s methods to the early diagnosis of cancer, in which progress has been poor, and to the management of co-morbidity as the proportion of elderly in the population increases. Baker also pays tribute to Julian Tudor Hart, our third commentator, whose work in primary care in a deprived community led to the formulation of his famous ‘inverse care law’ (Box 1). Hart returns to this theme in his commentary, using Mackenzie’s achievements eloquently to back up his call to resist and roll back the marketization of healthcare so that a rational integration of primary and secondary care can be re-achieved. Mackenzie was dismissive of noting every fact and detail for the sake of keeping records. As he saw it, prognosis was the real purpose of record taking: ‘to relate the life-history of disease in a number of people so that the signs which reveal the disease and show its progress and those which indicate danger can be recognized’. The added value that the experienced general practitioner brings to the mass of symptoms presented is the ability to differentiate and record only those that are essential. Mackenzie practised what he preached. His main interest was in cardiovascular disease and, to aid him in the analysis of heartbeat irregularities, he made recordings of the pulse, initially using a modified Dudgeon sphygmograph but from 1906 using his own invention, an ink writing polygraph (Figure 1 and Box 2). After 28 years of single-handed painstaking observations and recordings, Mackenzie published The Study of the Pulse, Arterial, Venous, and Hepatic, and of the Movements of the Heart in 1902. This book was pivotal in the development of cardiology, and his definitive work Diseases of the Heart was published 6 years later. Somewhat ironically for a Scot pivotal to cardiology research, Mackenzie died on Burns Night 1925, after suffering cardiac pain since 1908. According to his wishes, his heart was removed for post-mortem examination to ascertain what information it provided on the symptoms he had experienced. An account of these examinations was published by David Waterston and colleagues in the British Heart Journal 14 years after his death. Also somewhat ironically in light of Mackenzie’s passion for recording symptoms, the authors note that ‘In order to correlate the clinical symptoms with the pathological condition, it has been necessary to compile an account of Sir James Mackenzie’s illness. This has not been easy for, like Box 1: Summary from Julian Tudor Hart (1971) ‘The inverse care law’