Robert Bosch Stiftung

About: Robert Bosch Stiftung is a nonprofit organization based out in Stuttgart, Germany. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Health care & Poison control. The organization has 44 authors who have published 71 publications receiving 923 citations. The organization is also known as: Robert-Bosch-Stiftung & Robert Bosch Foundation.

Interprofessional Training Wards: Transcending Boundaries—Learning and Working Together

Abstract: This article reflects the relevance of interprofessional collaboration for staff development in healthcare. There is still potential for the development of interprofessional collaboration in the healthcare system. The dominating segmentation of care leads to care deficits as well as it increases the skilled labor shortage in healthcare. This project describes an interprofessional education department in Freiburg, Germany, where the medical students and nursing students work together. This successful pediatric education department offers us an amount of perspectives to develop and experiences to share.

The language of plague and its regional perspectives: the case of medieval Germany.

Abstract: “In the year of our Lord 1350 the greatest mortality of mankind, called the epidemia, ruled in the world so that the number of living men was insufficient to bury the others,” noted the chronicler Florence of Wevelinghoven in the middle of the fourteenth century.1 An eyewitness of the Black Death, he later became bishop of Munster in Westphalia (1364–78) and bishop of Utrecht (1378–93).2 The Westphalian cleric was only one among many to describe in these or in very similar words the unimaginable mortality caused by the Black Death. Contemporary records from all over Europe tell the same story: the disease appeared everywhere in the world and depopulated the cities, leaving too few survivors to bury the countless dead.3 It is this image of a “worldwide” pandemic of the Black Death, together with, to a lesser extent, descriptions of the subsequent outbreaks of plague by contemporaries, which has dominated the historian's view of medieval epidemics until today. But what one may call the language of plague, the language of the sources, comprises universal and particular aspects at the same time. As European society is not uniform (despite all attempts of the administration of the European Union) and has never been so in the past, one has to ask how far did the different geographical and cultural backgrounds of chroniclers and medical practitioners influence the language of plague? Are there any differences in the attitudes towards the disease and in the ways of dealing with medieval epidemics, even if the same words are used? Did an Italian really have exactly the same view of plague as a Spaniard, an Englishman or a German? What finally inspired me to ask these questions within the context of plague were several examples of such differences in sources of the period concerning another medical problem, the disease (or rather the diseases) contemporaries used to identify as leprosy.

How patients built up the practice of the lay homeopath Clemens von Bönninghausen: Quantitative and qualitative aspects of patient history

Abstract: Statistics seem to give little information about individuals’ fates. With the help of patient journals, the interwoven connections between quantitative and qualitative aspects of historical research work can be shown. This example focuses on the patients who, between 1829 and 1864, built up the practice of the lay homeopath Clemens Maria Franz von Bonninghausen in Munster, Westphalia. Questions of practice, the social structure of the clientele, and the diseases Bonninghausen treated are also considered.