Journal of evaluation in clinical practice
-
For over 50 years, clinical research methodology has wrestled with the problem of the lack of correspondence between tests of treatments and applications of treatments. The former comprise of trials featuring scrupulous control of patient eligibility, treatment compliance, clinician expertise, follow-up intensity, and so on. ⋯ The remedy, going by the name of "pragmatic trials," is to conduct clinical trials in conditions corresponding more closely to everyday practice. This solution has proved easier to utter than to execute, and the paper reviews the extensive literature on pragmatic trials, seeking to assess whether it has terminated in clarity or contestation.
-
It is common for primary care providers (PCPs) to manage complex multimorbidity. When caring for patients with multimorbidity, PCPs face challenges to tackle several issues within a short consultation in order to address patients' complex needs. ⋯ Using the Malaysian primary care setting as a case study, a dual-layer-shared decision-making approach is proposed whereby PCPs and patients make decisions on which disease(s) (layer 1) and treatment(s) (layer 2) to prioritize. This dual-layer model aims to address the challenges of short consultation time and limited healthcare resources by encouraging PCPs and patients to discuss, negotiate, and agree on the decision during the consultation to ensure patients' health needs are addressed.
-
Evidence-based medicine has claimed to be science on a number of occasions, but it is not clear that this status is deserved. Within the philosophy of science, four main theories about the nature of science are historically recognized: inductivism, falsificationism, Kuhnian paradigms, and research programmes. If evidence-based medicine is science, knowledge claims should be derived using a process that corresponds to one of these theories. ⋯ In the final section, possible counter arguments are considered. It is argued that the knowledge claims valued by evidence-based medicine are not justified using inductivism, falsificationism, Kuhnian paradigms, or research programmes. If these are the main criteria for evaluating if something is science or not, evidence-based medicine does not meet these criteria.
-
Much of the literature concerned with health care practice tends to focus on a decision-making model in which knowledge sits within the minds and bodies of health care workers. Practice theories de-centre knowledge from human actors, instead situating knowing in the interactions between all human and non-human actors. The purpose of this study was to explore how practice arises in the moment-to-moment interactions between general dental practitioners (GDPs), patients, nurses, and things. ⋯ Practices are ongoing ecological accomplishments to which people and things skilfully contribute through translation of their respective embodied knowing of multiple practices. Based on this, we argue that practices are more likely to improve if people and things embody practices of improvement.
-
Although there has been a focus on problematic issues related to health care services and complaints made by patients, individuals who suffer from medically unexplained syndromes continue to report being epistemically marginalized or excluded by health professionals. The aim of this article is to uncover a deeper understanding of the what-ness of experiencing being naked in the eyes of the public while waiting to be recognized as ill. Therefore, a phenomenological approach was chosen to inductively and holistically understand the human experience in this context-specific setting. ⋯ Lack of experienced support can lead to exacerbated feelings of distress. Accordingly, the psychosocial experience of being ill might be as important as its unknown aetiology. Therefore, in the context of these interpersonal relations, both norms, values, and attitudes, and issues of power need to be considered and addressed properly.