Diagnostic knowing in general practice: interpretative action and reflexivity.

Clicks: 374
ID: 49178
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #2 of 3 articles by views in scandinavian journal of primary health care

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Getting the right diagnosis is supposed to provide an explanation of a patient's health problem and inform health care decisions. As a core element of clinical reasoning, diagnosis deserves systematic and transparent analysis. Conceptual tools can make doctors become aware of and explore diagnostic knowing. We demonstrate diagnostic knowing analysed as interpretative and contextualised activity. Our analysis is based on Lonergan's theory of knowing, constituting the cognitive structures as experiencing, understanding, and judging, in a general practice case. Analysis makes the complexity of diagnostic knowing in this context more transparent, in this case concluding with four diagnostic labels: a corn, constipation, headache and atrial fibrillation. We demonstrate how a medically significant diagnosis does not necessarily evolve deductively from complaints. The opening lines from the patient give ideas of where to look for possible explanations - questions for understanding - rather than diagnostic hypotheses. Such questions emerge from the GP's experiences from meeting the patient, including imaginations and interpretations. When ideas and questions regarding diagnoses have been developed, they may be judged and subjected to reflection. Questioning may also emerge as transitory concerns, not extensively ruled out. Lonergan's theory demonstrated a strong fit with these aspects of diagnostic knowing in general practice. Analysis demonstrated systematic, transparent approaches to diagnostic knowing, relevant for clinical teaching. We argue that an interpretative understanding of diagnosis can change clinical practice, complementing hypothetico-deductive strategies by recognising additional substantial diagnostic modes and giving access to scholarly reflection. Key Points Diagnosis is a core element of clinical reasoning, deserving systematic and transparent analysis beyond hypothetico-deductive reasoning or pattern recognition Diagnostic knowing in general practice is a special instance of all human knowing with subjectivity, interpretation and reflexivity as essential elements Lonergan's theory for knowing based on experiencing, understanding, and judging allowed us to map, decode and recognise advanced acts of clinical reasoning We share our experiences of how these concepts gave us a tool for systematic analysis of the complexities taking place in the GP's office on an ordinary day.
Reference Key
malterud2019diagnosticscandinavian Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Malterud, Kirsti;Reventlow, Susanne;Guassora, Ann Dorrit;
Journal scandinavian journal of primary health care
Year 2019
DOI
10.1080/02813432.2019.1663592
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.