Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

JPMPH : Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health

OPEN ACCESS
SEARCH
Search

Articles

Page Path
HOME > J Prev Med Public Health > Volume 49(2); 2016 > Article
CorrespondenceAuthor Response
The Author Reply: A Comment on “Quaternary Prevention in Public Health”
Jong-Myon Baeorcid
Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health 2016;49(2):141-141.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3961/jpmph.16.032
Published online: March 31, 2016
  • 5,540 Views
  • 102 Download
  • 1 Crossref
  • 1 Scopus

Department of Preventive Medicine, Jeju National University School of Medicine, Jeju, Korea

Corresponding author: Jong-Myon Bae, MD, PhD  102 Jejudaehak-ro, Jeju 63243, Korea  Tel: +82-64-755-5567, Fax: +82-64-702-2687 E-mail: jmbae@jejunu.ac.kr

Copyright © 2016 The Korean Society for Preventive Medicine

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

See the letter "A Comment on “Quaternary Prevention in Public Health” by Dr. Jong-Myon Bae" on page 139.
It is an honor to receive your letter. Thank you for your interest in my perspective [1]. Your letter has invaluable advice and suggestions.
First of all, I consider that Table 1 from my perspective [1] may have confused you. The table was designed to highlight the differences in definitions of primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention between Leavell & Clark and you & Roland. To emphasize the fact that Leavell & Clark did not mention quaternary prevention (QP), I kept a blank in the Status column. In addition, I mentioned ‘the framework of primary-secondary-tertiary prevention that was proposed by Leavell and Clark in the 1940s’ in the second sentence. To clarify the fact, I agree with your suggestion to use a red line to delineate the concepts of each pair of authors.
I accept your idea of filling in the blank in the status cell with ‘Chaos’ because the supplier has concluded that the status is ‘no disease’ even though the consumer feels ill. I think that your suggestions of replacing ‘Conclusion’ with ‘Hypothesis’ and ‘Disease’ with ‘Challenging illness’ elaborate on the contents without losing my intended meaning.
I also fully agree with your argument that the family doctor as a primary care physician has to be competent in all fields. However, I have two reasons for emphasizing that clinical epidemiologists play a key role in QP. The first is that the Korean Middle East respiratory syndrome epidemic in 2015 spread to patients admitted to a hospital. To control the epidemic, I emphasized the role of infection epidemiologists in hospitals. The second is that pharmaco-epidemiology including pharmacovigilance and adverse event reporting for managing the preventable harms of drugs could be covered in the scope of clinical epidemiology.
I hope your suggestions and my responses help our readers understand the concept of QP.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The author has no conflicts of interest with associated the material presented in this paper.

  • 1. Bae JM. Implementation of quaternary prevention in the Korean healthcare system: lessons from the 2015 Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus outbreak in the Republic of Korea. J Prev Med Public Health 2015;48(6):271-273.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF

Figure & Data

References

    Citations

    Citations to this article as recorded by  
    • Primary Care Physicians’ Action Plans for Responding to Results of Screening Tests Based on the Concept of Quaternary Prevention
      Jong-Myon Bae, Marc Jamoulle
      Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health.2016; 49(6): 343.     CrossRef


    JPMPH : Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health