Hopefully, as you read this issue of the Journal you will be surrounded by signs of spring. As I began to write this editorial, the winds of winter howled outside mywindow. To some, like Coleridge [1], winter is an idyllic retreat as sweet as summer. To others, it is a tangle of canceled flights, backs made sore from shoveling, and fits of cabin fever. It also presents an opportunity to find time to tackle the mountain of books growing alongside a favorite easy chair. My typical reading list is rather atypical, and this season’s readings ranged from archeology to zoology with a few novels thrown in for good measure. One piece that struck a chord with me was an item in archeology which recounted the discovery of a nearly intact, 60,000 year-old human skeleton [2]. Anatomical examination revealed the presence of a hyoid bone which investigators speculate would have allowed our ancestors the ability to engage in complex speech. Even more remarkable is the discovery of the hyoid bone, not yet studied, of a 500,000 year-old Homo heidelbergensis. If anatomical examination is confirmatory, this suggests that our ancestors were able to engage in oral conversations nearly 500,000 years ago or, for you numerists, 5 lakhs or half aMak. That really got me thinking...about communication. There can be little debate that significant changes have occurred to mankind and our social environment sinceH. heidelbergensis roamed the earth. And yet, while we have eschewed the cave for more comfortable domiciles, gone from eating raw rhino to a well-done burger, replaced the stone tipped spear with other more heinous and efficient weaponry, and worry more about “the”web rather than a spider web, we continue to struggle with communication. Certainl,y our collective vocabulary has grown. We have amassed libraries full of written words that educate, entertain, and inspire us. Yet, in someways, we have not really changed. Our libraries are a repository of our literary evolution containing works ranging from Beowulf to works cited in the latest best seller list, works whose meaning need be rediscovered by each new generation. Yet while mankind’s hyoid has remained relatively unchanged, individual members of the species must relearn how to communicate. The first part of the how—the actual mechanics and base meanings of speech take the average human until age 5 or 6 to begin to master. They begin with one word sentences, then two, three, etc. Soon, almost by magic, they begin communicating concepts evolving from a crying child who is hungry to one who states “want chee-chees” (my own children’s early requests for Cheerios). As we evolve both personally and professionally, our need to develop more complex communications increases. This is especially evident in the area of healthcare. When I began in this profession, more years ago than I care to profess, the pamphlet was considered an avant-garde means of patient communication. We debated the message, reading level, layout, colors, and pictures. The belief was that if the patient reads our message, then they would change their behavior. Unfortunately, this was not the case, and our approach has since changed dramatically. The literature is replete with articles proposing, evaluating, and revising approaches to patient, public, and professional communication. There are entire journals devoted to the topic such as Communication & Health Outcomes, Communication and Medicine, Health Communications, and many more. The number of articles published in this area has grown exponentially. A quick search via Scopus revealed that in 1994, there were approximately 100 articles published in the realm of communication and cancer. That number grew to nearly 300 in 2003 and A. M. Michalek (*) Doctoral Programs Health Policy & Health Education Health Administration, D’Youville College, Buffalo, NY, USA e-mail: jceditor1@gmail.com
Read full abstract
Jan 2, 2019
Kobi Peled 
Open Access