Thesis (M. Sc.)--Carleton University, 2002. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 90-93). Also available in electronic format on the Internet.

Thesis (Ed. D.)--West Virginia University, 2005. / Title from document title page. Document formatted into pages; contains viii, 179 p. : ill. (some col.). Vita. Includes abstract. Includes bibliographical references (p. 141-146).

Thesis (M.Ed.)--Kutztown University of Pennsylvania, 1983. / Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 45-06, page: 2770.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Nebraska, 1992. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 129-136).

Thesis (M.S.)--Rowan University, 2008. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Nebraska, 1992. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 129-136).

Thesis (M.Ed.)--Bowling Green State University, 2010. / Document formatted into pages; contains vi, 85 p. ; ill. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 1985. / Includes vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 284-296). Available online via OhioLINK's ETD Center.

No description available.

Class of 2011 Abstract / OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the level of accuracy in terms of medical information presented in the popular television show, House, MD. This is part of a larger ongoing study, and evaluates only the first 11 episodes of season four. METHODS: This study was a descriptive, retrospective assessment of the first 11 episodes in the fourth season of the medical television drama, House, MD. The signs and symptoms, diagnostic procedures, and medical treatment for one major disease portrayed in each episode were recorded and compared to authoritative medical sources. Based on the medical resource material used, an accuracy score for each of the three above-mentioned variables in each episode was assigned. Three researchers evaluated these ratings individually. A collaborative rating was determined for all three variables for all eleven episodes. RESULTS: The average accuracy scores for presenting signs and symptoms, diagnostic procedures, and medical treatments were 2.36, 1.82, and 1.91, respectively. The average accuracy score across the three variables resulted in a rating of 2.03. Episode one was excluded from the final analysis. The one-way ANOVA, Tukey’s HSD test and the Kruskal Wallis test all found no significant difference among the data. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not excluded in this analysis. CONCLUSION: The presenting symptoms, diagnostic procedures, and medical treatments shown in the eleven episodes evaluated were not significantly different in terms of level of accuracy. The average accuracy score of the eleven episodes indicated that the information presented was correct but somewhat unusual.