03560591

May 19, 2025, 11:23

Reader’s expertise on the topic of the manuscript

Does the reader have a conflict of interest?

The overall quality of the manuscript, based on the above-listed criteria, should be evaluated and classified according to the following five categories

Language quality (style, grammar, and spelling) should be evaluated and classified according to the following five categories.

The article is devoted to the problem of introducing narrative medicine into primary health care systems. This process is part of the enriching the humanistic dimensions of medical care and, in general, of a systemic approach to maintaining public health. The relevance of this problem has significantly increased recently due to the increasing role of instrumental component of the medical industry and some dehumanization associated primarily with the crisis of individualizing clinical approach and increasing standardization in the provision of medical services. It is expected that the development of narrative medicine can improve the comfort of doctor-patient interaction, provide a personalized approach with improved diagnostic efficiency and quality of treatment. The authors analyze the main problems of the widespread introduction of narrative medicine in primary health care, namely, the strengthening of the humanitarian component in the educational programs of medical professionals, increasing the burden on the staff, the need to allocate additional funds, the peculiarities of the national health care system of China. The article discusses possible solutions to some of these problems, such as the involvement of volunteers, application of artificial intelligence, optimization of equipment operation mode in order to save money. Feedback mechanisms, telemedicine methods, etc. are built into the implementation system proposed by the authors. However, it seems that the proposed schemes need experimental validation, which requires the creation of interdisciplinary research groups in which doctors and humanities can interact. Given the peculiarities of the humanitarian environment of Chinese society, it would be appropriate to include representatives of different schools of psychology and even philosophy in such groups. In general, given the novelty of the problem and its relevance, the quality of the article is quite high.

First, thank you very much for your professional comments on the article published in World Journal of Clinical Cases. Second, we read your comments with great interest. You are welcome to format your valuable comments into a Letter to the Editor and submit it online to World Journal of Clinical Cases at https://www.f6publishing.com. There are no restrictions on the number of words, figures (color, B/W) or authors for a Letter to the Editor. In addition, the article processing charge will be exempted for this Letter to the Editor. As with all articles published by the Baishideng Publishing Group, the Letter to the Editor will be published online after completing peer review. The guidelines for a Letter to the Editor can be found at: https://www.wjgnet.com/bpg/GerInfo/219. Finally, we look forward to receiving your high-quality Letter to the Editor, which will promote academic communication and lead the development of this discipline.

Replied on May 28, 2025, 10:56

Thank you very much for your kind and insightful comments on our recently published article, "Embedding Narrative Medicine in Primary Healthcare: Exploration and Practice from a Medical Humanities Perspective." We deeply appreciate the time and attention you’ve devoted to reviewing our work, and we are thrilled that the relevance and depth of the topic resonated with you. Your observation about the growing instrumentalization of healthcare and its dehumanizing effects is an issue we passionately address in the paper. As you rightly pointed out, narrative medicine has the potential to counterbalance this trend by fostering more individualized, compassionate interactions between healthcare providers and patients. It’s encouraging to know that our work on this subject aligns so well with your concerns. We also truly value your thoughtful critique on the challenges of integrating narrative medicine, particularly the need for enhanced medical humanities education, managing staff workload, and addressing the financial constraints within healthcare systems. These are significant obstacles we continue to consider as we advocate for broader adoption of narrative medicine. Your suggestions to leverage volunteers, artificial intelligence, and telemedicine are particularly pertinent and reinforce the direction we hope to explore in future initiatives. Your insights into optimizing healthcare systems through these solutions are a timely reminder of the practicality we need to bring to such an ambitious endeavor. Regarding the need for experimental validation of the proposed frameworks, we wholeheartedly agree. As we continue to refine our approach, we recognize that testing these models in real-world settings is crucial. Your recommendation for the formation of interdisciplinary research groups, where medical professionals collaborate with experts from the humanities, psychology, and philosophy, is an excellent suggestion that we plan to pursue in future research. Given the unique cultural context of Chinese society, incorporating diverse perspectives will be invaluable in ensuring that the framework is both effective and culturally sensitive. We are truly grateful for your recognition of the paper’s quality and for elevating the discussion with your constructive comments. The conversation around narrative medicine is still evolving, and your feedback will undoubtedly shape how we move forward with this research, particularly in addressing the complexities of implementing such approaches on a larger scale. Your contribution has been immensely helpful, and we look forward to building on these ideas in our future work. Once again, thank you for your thoughtful feedback. It has been a privilege to engage with you, and we are excited about the potential for continued collaboration and discussion as we further explore the intersection of narrative medicine and primary healthcare.

08215565

May 17, 2025, 16:26

Reader’s expertise on the topic of the manuscript

Does the reader have a conflict of interest?

The overall quality of the manuscript, based on the above-listed criteria, should be evaluated and classified according to the following five categories

Language quality (style, grammar, and spelling) should be evaluated and classified according to the following five categories.

This study addresses the deficit of medical humanities in China’s resource-limited primary healthcare (PHC) system by systematically exploring pathways to integrate narrative medicine (NM) into grassroots care. Situated within the Healthy China 2030 policy framework, the research proposes actionable strategies for humanizing PHC through theoretical analysis and practical innovations, such as the One-Minute Patient Narrative and 11253 Family Doctor Service Model. Key contributions include: (1) revealing tensions between policy mandates and on-the-ground realities, emphasizing NM’s localization to regional disparities; (2) enhancing care efficiency via AI-mediated narrative analysis (e.g., a 25% increase in treatment adherence); and (3) offering scalable models to ensure PHC sustainability. However, three critical gaps require further exploration. First, cultural dynamics—such as patients’ traditional deference to medical authority and healthcare commercialization—demand culturally adaptive interventions (e.g., competency training for clinicians, redefining relational medicine values). Current analyses lack actionable steps to operationalize these strategies across diverse contexts. Second, sustainability challenges—including the feasibility of urban NM models in high-demand rural settings and volunteer system stability in under-resourced areas—are underexamined. Systemic inequities (e.g., funding gaps, workforce shortages) further constrain implementation. Third, while short-term metrics like patient satisfaction are prioritized, long-term systemic issues—health equity, clinician burnout, and bureaucratic barriers to PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Act) cycles—remain unaddressed. Future studies must adopt mixed-method evaluations to bridge these gaps and enable NM’s transition from pilot projects to systemic reform. To further this agenda, this study presents a three-pillar framework. Firstly, by fostering interdisciplinary collaboration, we aim to integrate public health experts, community advocates, and policymakers. Together, they will devise NM interventions, such as narrative-driven public health campaigns. This approach will transform patient stories into effective social governance tools, thereby enhancing the inclusivity of medical decision-making. Secondly, we propose establishing an ethical AI governance system. This system will ensure that AI-driven narrative data processing aligns with China's data security regulations. We plan to adopt encryption technology and an informed consent mechanism to bolster privacy protections. Additionally, we will systematically mitigate technical biases through algorithm fairness audits and transparent training protocols, including the use of open dataset sources. Finally, we advocate for a global localization adaptation strategy, drawing inspiration from international practices like the Indian Asha worker model. While respecting the universal principle of patient autonomy, we intend to devise localized solutions, such as a health narrative literacy improvement project tailored for rural areas. This will facilitate the effective integration of medical humanistic values within diverse social and cultural contexts. Ultimately, this framework aims to shift healthcare paradigms from fragmented, biomarker-centric models to holistic, humanistic systems. By empowering patients and frontline workers as NM co-designers through participatory research, localized innovations can catalyze structural reforms, ensuring medical services prioritize humanistic care over purely biomedical metrics.

First, thank you very much for your professional comments on the article published in World Journal of Clinical Cases. Second, we read your comments with great interest. You are welcome to format your valuable comments into a Letter to the Editor and submit it online to World Journal of Clinical Cases at https://www.f6publishing.com. There are no restrictions on the number of words, figures (color, B/W) or authors for a Letter to the Editor. In addition, the article processing charge will be exempted for this Letter to the Editor. As with all articles published by the Baishideng Publishing Group, the Letter to the Editor will be published online after completing peer review. The guidelines for a Letter to the Editor can be found at: https://www.wjgnet.com/bpg/GerInfo/219. Finally, we look forward to receiving your high-quality Letter to the Editor, which will promote academic communication and lead the development of this discipline.

Replied on May 17, 2025, 22:56

We sincerely thank the reader for their thoughtful engagement with our article and for raising important points that contribute meaningfully to the academic and practical discourse surrounding the integration of narrative medicine (NM) into China’s primary healthcare (PHC) system. Your recognition of the urgent need to address the deficit of medical humanities in resource-constrained PHC settings aligns closely with our motivation for conducting this study. We appreciate your attention to both the strengths of our proposed interventions—such as the One-Minute Patient Narrative and the 11253 Family Doctor Service Model—and the critical gaps you identified regarding cultural adaptability, sustainability, and long-term structural reform. In response to your comments: Cultural Dynamics and Local Adaptation: We agree that the traditional patient-doctor hierarchy and the increasing commercialization of healthcare pose challenges to implementing humanistic approaches. Your suggestion to embed culturally adaptive strategies is well taken. In future iterations of our framework, we intend to include competency-based training modules for clinicians that incorporate local sociocultural narratives and ethical reflections to help redefine the value of relational medicine in diverse contexts. Sustainability and Systemic Inequities: You raise a crucial point about the feasibility of scaling NM models, particularly in under-resourced rural areas. We acknowledge this limitation and are currently designing a pilot study to evaluate the adaptability of urban NM practices in rural township hospitals, with a focus on workforce capacity and financial support mechanisms. Furthermore, we plan to investigate ways to stabilize the volunteer-based components of NM interventions through institutional partnerships and policy support. Long-Term Outcomes and Structural Barriers: We appreciate your observation that short-term metrics like patient satisfaction do not fully capture systemic change. To address this, we are in the process of developing a mixed-method evaluation protocol that includes longitudinal data collection on clinician burnout rates, healthcare equity indicators, and administrative workflow efficiency, particularly in relation to PDCA cycles. We also appreciate your endorsement of our proposed three-pillar framework. Your affirmation of the need for ethical AI governance, interdisciplinary collaboration, and globally localized models encourages us to continue refining and operationalizing this framework in future research. We will take special care to incorporate your suggestions on improving patient narrative literacy and exploring international comparative models more thoroughly. Once again, we thank you for your valuable feedback. Engaging with readers who critically reflect on our work not only enriches academic discourse but also helps translate theory into effective practice.

Replied on May 17, 2025, 22:56

We sincerely thank the reader for their thoughtful engagement with our article and for raising important points that contribute meaningfully to the academic and practical discourse surrounding the integration of narrative medicine (NM) into China’s primary healthcare (PHC) system. Your recognition of the urgent need to address the deficit of medical humanities in resource-constrained PHC settings aligns closely with our motivation for conducting this study. We appreciate your attention to both the strengths of our proposed interventions—such as the One-Minute Patient Narrative and the 11253 Family Doctor Service Model—and the critical gaps you identified regarding cultural adaptability, sustainability, and long-term structural reform. In response to your comments: Cultural Dynamics and Local Adaptation: We agree that the traditional patient-doctor hierarchy and the increasing commercialization of healthcare pose challenges to implementing humanistic approaches. Your suggestion to embed culturally adaptive strategies is well taken. In future iterations of our framework, we intend to include competency-based training modules for clinicians that incorporate local sociocultural narratives and ethical reflections to help redefine the value of relational medicine in diverse contexts. Sustainability and Systemic Inequities: You raise a crucial point about the feasibility of scaling NM models, particularly in under-resourced rural areas. We acknowledge this limitation and are currently designing a pilot study to evaluate the adaptability of urban NM practices in rural township hospitals, with a focus on workforce capacity and financial support mechanisms. Furthermore, we plan to investigate ways to stabilize the volunteer-based components of NM interventions through institutional partnerships and policy support. Long-Term Outcomes and Structural Barriers: We appreciate your observation that short-term metrics like patient satisfaction do not fully capture systemic change. To address this, we are in the process of developing a mixed-method evaluation protocol that includes longitudinal data collection on clinician burnout rates, healthcare equity indicators, and administrative workflow efficiency, particularly in relation to PDCA cycles. We also appreciate your endorsement of our proposed three-pillar framework. Your affirmation of the need for ethical AI governance, interdisciplinary collaboration, and globally localized models encourages us to continue refining and operationalizing this framework in future research. We will take special care to incorporate your suggestions on improving patient narrative literacy and exploring international comparative models more thoroughly. Once again, we thank you for your valuable feedback. Engaging with readers who critically reflect on our work not only enriches academic discourse but also helps translate theory into effective practice.