Patient Expertise and Medical Authority: Epistemic Implications for the Provider-Patient Relationship.

IF 1.3 3区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS Journal of Medicine and Philosophy Pub Date : 2024-01-13 DOI:10.1093/jmp/jhad045
Jamie Carlin Watson
{"title":"Patient Expertise and Medical Authority: Epistemic Implications for the Provider-Patient Relationship.","authors":"Jamie Carlin Watson","doi":"10.1093/jmp/jhad045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The provider-patient relationship is typically regarded as an expert-to-novice relationship, and with good reason. Providers have extensive education and experience that have developed in them the competence to treat conditions better and with fewer harms than anyone else. However, some researchers argue that many patients with long-term conditions (LTCs), such as arthritis and chronic pain, have become \"experts\" at managing their LTC. Unfortunately, there is no generally agreed-upon conception of \"patient expertise\" or what it implies for the provider-patient relationship. I review three prominent accounts of patient expertise and argue that all face serious objections. I contend, however, that a plausible account of patient expertise is available and that it provides a framework both for further empirical studies and for enhancing the provider-patient relationship.</p>","PeriodicalId":47377,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medicine and Philosophy","volume":" ","pages":"58-71"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medicine and Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhad045","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The provider-patient relationship is typically regarded as an expert-to-novice relationship, and with good reason. Providers have extensive education and experience that have developed in them the competence to treat conditions better and with fewer harms than anyone else. However, some researchers argue that many patients with long-term conditions (LTCs), such as arthritis and chronic pain, have become "experts" at managing their LTC. Unfortunately, there is no generally agreed-upon conception of "patient expertise" or what it implies for the provider-patient relationship. I review three prominent accounts of patient expertise and argue that all face serious objections. I contend, however, that a plausible account of patient expertise is available and that it provides a framework both for further empirical studies and for enhancing the provider-patient relationship.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
患者专业知识和医疗权威:医患关系的认知意义。
提供者与患者的关系通常被视为专家与新手的关系,这是有充分理由的。提供者拥有丰富的教育和经验,他们比任何人都有能力更好地治疗疾病,减少伤害。然而,一些研究人员认为,许多患有长期疾病(LTCs)的患者,如关节炎和慢性疼痛,已经成为管理LTC的“专家”。不幸的是,对于“患者专业知识”的概念,或者它对提供者-患者关系意味着什么,目前还没有达成一致。我回顾了三篇关于患者专业知识的突出报道,并认为所有这些都面临着严重的反对意见。然而,我认为,对患者专业知识的合理描述是可用的,它为进一步的实证研究和加强医患关系提供了一个框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
6.20%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: This bimonthly publication explores the shared themes and concerns of philosophy and the medical sciences. Central issues in medical research and practice have important philosophical dimensions, for, in treating disease and promoting health, medicine involves presuppositions about human goals and values. Conversely, the concerns of philosophy often significantly relate to those of medicine, as philosophers seek to understand the nature of medical knowledge and the human condition in the modern world. In addition, recent developments in medical technology and treatment create moral problems that raise important philosophical questions. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy aims to provide an ongoing forum for the discussion of such themes and issues.
期刊最新文献
Disability, Offense, and the Expressivist Objection to Medical Aid in Dying. Kidney Sales and Disrespectful Demands: A Reply to Rippon. Plastic Resilience: Rethinking Resilience in Illness with Catherine Malabou. A Defense of the Obligation to Keep Promises to the Dead. Why Moral Bioenhancement Cannot Reliably Produce Virtue.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1