Moving past phronesis: clinical reasoning in person-centered care

S. Copeland
{"title":"Moving past phronesis: clinical reasoning in person-centered care","authors":"S. Copeland","doi":"10.5750/ejpch.v8i3.1860","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Phronesis has been a popular concept among those attempting to categorize and understand the kind of reasoning that doctor’s employ in the clinic. However, this paper argues that it is not the best possible concept for understanding the kind of reasoning necessary for person-centred care. First, it attends to what is lacking in that concept, and then it proposes an alternative (the concept of effectual reasoning) to demonstrate the potential for a better understanding of clinical reasoning as both open-ended and strategic. That approach is better than phronesis because it allows us to address both relational aspects of autonomy, and the need to center all persons, as such, including healthcare practitioners as well as patients, in healthcare.","PeriodicalId":72966,"journal":{"name":"European journal for person centered healthcare","volume":"23 1","pages":"315-322"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal for person centered healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5750/ejpch.v8i3.1860","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Phronesis has been a popular concept among those attempting to categorize and understand the kind of reasoning that doctor’s employ in the clinic. However, this paper argues that it is not the best possible concept for understanding the kind of reasoning necessary for person-centred care. First, it attends to what is lacking in that concept, and then it proposes an alternative (the concept of effectual reasoning) to demonstrate the potential for a better understanding of clinical reasoning as both open-ended and strategic. That approach is better than phronesis because it allows us to address both relational aspects of autonomy, and the need to center all persons, as such, including healthcare practitioners as well as patients, in healthcare.
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
超越现实:以人为本的临床推理
在那些试图对医生在诊所使用的推理进行分类和理解的人中间,Phronesis一直是一个流行的概念。然而,本文认为,这并不是理解以人为本的护理所必需的那种推理的最佳概念。首先,它关注这个概念中所缺乏的东西,然后它提出了一个替代方案(有效推理的概念),以展示更好地理解临床推理作为开放式和战略性的潜力。这种方法比phronesis更好,因为它使我们能够解决自主性的关系方面,以及在医疗保健中以所有人为中心的需要,包括医疗保健从业人员和患者。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The ethical and epistemic roles of narrative in person-centred healthcare Person-Centred Healthcare versus Patient Centricity - what is the difference and how are pharmaceutical companies aiming to secure internal representation of the patient voice? Moving past phronesis: clinical reasoning in person-centered care Persons over models: shared decision-making for person-centered medicine lifestyle and degeneracy
×
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