Do biomedical models of illness make for good healthcare systems?

Wade, Derick; Halligan, Peter W.

doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7479.1398

Cited by 338 publications

(272 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

240

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Each technical innovation is rapidly disseminated throughout the scientific community and technological developments quickly become widespread. Therefore, progress is no longer an option arising out of technology that we can then use as we please, but rather becomes an inherent driving force itself, one which goes beyond human desires (Kornelsen, 2005;Wade and Halligan, 2004).This new role for technology can be clearly seen in all areas of life, although particularly in the field of health sciences (Marquez and Meneu, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Satisfaction with pregnancy and birth services: The quality of maternity care services as experienced by women

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Satisfaction with pregnancy and birth services: The quality of maternity care services as experienced by women

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It is also clear, however, that chronic diseases and disorders which arise from the behavior of individuals cannot successfully be explained or addressed through a purely scientific model. Wade and Halligan (2004) described three assumptions that account for the limited use of a purely bio-medical model: all illness has a single underlying cause, disease (pathology) is always the consequence of the single cause, and removal or attenuation of the disease will result in a return to health. They add the following as components of a reductionist model:…”

Section: A Summary Of the Scientific Theory Of Medicinementioning

confidence: 99%

A theory of psychosomatic medicine: An attempt at an explanatory summary

Langewitz¹

2009

Semiotica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article investigates issues in psychosomatic medicine that could broadly be seen as concerned with the status of 'subjective' and 'objective' realms. Initially, it considers two seemingly opposing perspectives, the biomedical model and the constructivist/semiotic model. The bio-medical model has all the set-backs of a positivistic and deterministic model: there is an unambiguous reality that can be ascertained given a detailed enough analysis. It furthermore assumes that observations can be explained by the application of linear causal relationships between the single components of reality. The constructivist perspective and the semiotic way of thinking view life and individuals moving through their life as dealing with particular signs; by applying semiotic thinking we understand why certain elements were selected out of the environment and why they were given a specific meaning. It suggests that some of the di‰culties arising from these models can be ameliorated with reference to the neo-phenomenology of Hermann Schmitz. In particular, the concept of the lived body (Leib) assists in understanding the relationship between a patient and his environment.

show abstract

“…1 Although this model has generally proven valuable, it has received criticism for being inefficient in the practice of general medicine and social insurance medicine over the past decades. 2,3 An increasing proportion of long-term sickness absence is caused by musculoskeletal disorders, mental health disorders, and subjective health complaints. 4 In these cases, assessment and diagnosis is necessarily based on the GP's interpretation of symptoms and the patients' subjective reports, rather than on pathological changes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3 Consequently, models based on a biopsychosocial approach are increasingly receiving attention. 2 These models integrate a biomedical approach with a social understanding of illness, and they focus on individuals' ability to function within their environment. Hence, the functional approach is reclaiming a place in the practice of general medicine.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%