Reason and value: making reasoning fit for practice

Loughlin, Michael; Bluhm, Robyn; Buetow, Stephen; Upshur, Ross; Goldenberg, Maya J.; Borgerson, Kirstin; Entwistle, Vikki; Kingma, Elselijn

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2753.2012.01896.x

Cited by 18 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Evidence‐based practice is concerned with generalizations and probabilities, ie, the probability of an intervention working for a described population, while eliminating bias . Generalizable knowledge however is insufficient for professional practice as professional practice is concerned with particulars, the individual within a specific context …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phronesis: practical wisdom the role of professional practice knowledge in the clinical reasoning of Bobath instructors

Vaughan-Graham

Cott

2016

Evaluation Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phronesis: practical wisdom the role of professional practice knowledge in the clinical reasoning of Bobath instructors

Vaughan-Graham

Cott

2016

Evaluation Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The scaled χ 2 difference test shows that Model 1 is not significantly different from the judicious use HIT measure (Model 2). In theory, epistemological elements and professional concerns are essences of clinical reasoning [49]. In this respect, Model 1 may be a more comprehensive measure.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A task-fit measure of health information technology use

Tsang¹

2013

EJPCH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rationale, aims and objectives: Introducing profession concerns into the evaluation of health information technology (HIT) use is an important and developing practice. A comprehensive evaluation should include the intellect elements of HIT use. This paper proposes a task-fit measure of HIT that integrates an information/knowledge quality scale into a validated judicious HIT use measure. It also presents some statistics that have implications for policy-making and curriculum development. Methods: Statistical analyses were performed on a subset of survey data. A structural equation modelling technique was applied to examine the associations among intent to use HIT, professional concerns and information/knowledge quality. Results:The statistical results show that altruism, autonomy, physician-patient relationship, (subconscious) autonomy, digestible information and medical history associate with each other to different extents. Only altruism and medical history show to be significant determinants of intent to use at p<0.001 and p<0.05 respectively. The scaled χ 2 difference test shows that this model is not significantly different from the judicious HIT use model. Conclusion:The statistical results suggest that professional concerns, digestible information and person-related information are HIT use decision factors. Perhaps physicians may prefer HITs considered to be compatible with practising the science, humanism and ethics of medicine simultaneously. This research direction will potentially contribute to identifying the taskfit HITs and the corresponding policies for re-orientating medicine to be a science-using and compassionate practice in this eHealth era, thereby promoting the development of person-centered healthcare.

show abstract

“…In each case, by abandoning the notion of knowledge as something “sitting in the mind”, construing knowledge instead in dispositional terms—as a form of interaction—traditional distinctions between knowledge and decision making, epistemology and ethics, are broken down. The result is a theoretical framework more directly focused on the needs of practice …”

Section: Knowledge Communication and Informality: Judgement And Evidmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interactions between persons—Knowledge, decision making, and the co‐production of practice

Loughlin

Buetow

Cournoyea

et al. 2019

Evaluation Clinical Practice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is now broad agreement that ideas like person‐centred care, patient expertise and shared decision‐making are no longer peripheral to health discourse, fine ideals or merely desirable additions to sound, scientific clinical practice. Rather, their incorporation into our thinking and planning of health and social care is essential if we are to respond adequately to the problems that confront us: they need to be seen not as “ethical add‐ons” but core components of any genuinely integrated, realistic and conceptually sound account of healthcare practice. This, the tenth philosophy thematic edition of the journal, presents papers conducting urgent research into the social context of scientific knowledge and the significance of viewing clinical knowledge not as something that “sits within the minds” of researchers and practitioners, but as a relational concept, the product of social interactions. It includes papers on the nature of reasoning and evidence, the on‐going problems of how to ‘integrate’ different forms of scientific knowledge with broader, humanistic understandings of reasoning and judgement, patient and community perspectives. Discussions of the epistemological contribution of patient perspectives to the nature of care, and the crucial and still under‐developed role of phenomenology in medical epistemology, are followed by a broad range of papers focussing on shared decision‐making, analysing its proper meaning, its role in policy, methods for realising it and its limitations in real‐world contexts.

show abstract

Reason and value: making reasoning fit for practice

Cited by 18 publications

References 70 publications

Phronesis: practical wisdom the role of professional practice knowledge in the clinical reasoning of Bobath instructors

Phronesis: practical wisdom the role of professional practice knowledge in the clinical reasoning of Bobath instructors

A task-fit measure of health information technology use

Interactions between persons—Knowledge, decision making, and the co‐production of practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About