数字时代的反思要求:利用阿彻的 "断裂式反身性 "理论分析英国全科医学中不断扩大的不平等现象。

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Sociology of health & illness Pub Date : 2024-06-22 DOI:10.1111/1467-9566.13811
Sarah Rybczynska-Bunt, Richard Byng, Sophie Spitters, Sara E Shaw, Ben Jameson, Trisha Greenhalgh
{"title":"数字时代的反思要求:利用阿彻的 \"断裂式反身性 \"理论分析英国全科医学中不断扩大的不平等现象。","authors":"Sarah Rybczynska-Bunt, Richard Byng, Sophie Spitters, Sara E Shaw, Ben Jameson, Trisha Greenhalgh","doi":"10.1111/1467-9566.13811","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>'Reflexivity', as used by Margaret Archer, means creative self-mastery that enables individuals to evaluate their social situation and act purposively within it. People with complex health and social needs may be less able to reflect on their predicament and act to address it. Reflexivity is imperative in complex and changing social situations. The substantial widening of health inequities since the introduction of remote and digital modalities in health care has been well-documented but inadequately theorised. In this article, we use Archer's theory of fractured reflexivity to understand digital disparities in data from a 28-month longitudinal ethnographic study of 12 UK general practices and a sample of in-depth clinical cases from 'Deep End' practices serving highly deprived populations. Through four composite patient cases crafted to illustrate different dimensions of disadvantage, we show how adverse past experiences and structural inequities intersect with patients' reflexive capacity to self-advocate and act strategically. In some cases, staff were able to use creative workarounds to compensate for patients' fractured reflexivity, but such actions were limited by workforce capacity and staff awareness. Unless a more systematic safety net is introduced and resourced, people with complex needs are likely to remain multiply disadvantaged by remote and digital health care.</p>","PeriodicalId":21685,"journal":{"name":"Sociology of health & illness","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The reflexive imperative in the digital age: Using Archer's 'fractured reflexivity' to theorise widening inequities in UK general practice.\",\"authors\":\"Sarah Rybczynska-Bunt, Richard Byng, Sophie Spitters, Sara E Shaw, Ben Jameson, Trisha Greenhalgh\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1467-9566.13811\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>'Reflexivity', as used by Margaret Archer, means creative self-mastery that enables individuals to evaluate their social situation and act purposively within it. People with complex health and social needs may be less able to reflect on their predicament and act to address it. Reflexivity is imperative in complex and changing social situations. The substantial widening of health inequities since the introduction of remote and digital modalities in health care has been well-documented but inadequately theorised. In this article, we use Archer's theory of fractured reflexivity to understand digital disparities in data from a 28-month longitudinal ethnographic study of 12 UK general practices and a sample of in-depth clinical cases from 'Deep End' practices serving highly deprived populations. Through four composite patient cases crafted to illustrate different dimensions of disadvantage, we show how adverse past experiences and structural inequities intersect with patients' reflexive capacity to self-advocate and act strategically. In some cases, staff were able to use creative workarounds to compensate for patients' fractured reflexivity, but such actions were limited by workforce capacity and staff awareness. Unless a more systematic safety net is introduced and resourced, people with complex needs are likely to remain multiply disadvantaged by remote and digital health care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21685,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociology of health & illness\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociology of health & illness\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.13811\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociology of health & illness","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.13811","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

玛格丽特-阿切尔(Margaret Archer)所说的 "反思性 "是指创造性的自我超越,使个人能够评估其社会处境并在其中采取有目的的行动。有复杂健康和社会需求的人可能不太能够反思自己的困境并采取行动加以解决。在复杂多变的社会环境中,反思是必不可少的。自从在医疗保健中引入远程和数字模式以来,医疗不平等现象大幅扩大,这一点已经得到了充分的证明,但却没有得到充分的理论阐述。在这篇文章中,我们运用阿彻的断裂反射理论,通过对英国 12 家全科诊所进行的为期 28 个月的纵向人种学研究数据,以及服务于高度贫困人口的 "深渊 "诊所的深度临床病例样本,来理解数字差异。通过四个综合病例,我们展示了过去的不利经历和结构性不平等是如何与患者的自我辩护和策略行动的反思能力相交织的。在某些情况下,工作人员能够使用创造性的变通办法来弥补病人的反射能力不足,但这种行动受到工作人员能力和意识的限制。除非引入更系统的安全网并为其提供资源,否则有复杂需求的人很可能会因为远程和数字化医疗服务而处于更加不利的地位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The reflexive imperative in the digital age: Using Archer's 'fractured reflexivity' to theorise widening inequities in UK general practice.

'Reflexivity', as used by Margaret Archer, means creative self-mastery that enables individuals to evaluate their social situation and act purposively within it. People with complex health and social needs may be less able to reflect on their predicament and act to address it. Reflexivity is imperative in complex and changing social situations. The substantial widening of health inequities since the introduction of remote and digital modalities in health care has been well-documented but inadequately theorised. In this article, we use Archer's theory of fractured reflexivity to understand digital disparities in data from a 28-month longitudinal ethnographic study of 12 UK general practices and a sample of in-depth clinical cases from 'Deep End' practices serving highly deprived populations. Through four composite patient cases crafted to illustrate different dimensions of disadvantage, we show how adverse past experiences and structural inequities intersect with patients' reflexive capacity to self-advocate and act strategically. In some cases, staff were able to use creative workarounds to compensate for patients' fractured reflexivity, but such actions were limited by workforce capacity and staff awareness. Unless a more systematic safety net is introduced and resourced, people with complex needs are likely to remain multiply disadvantaged by remote and digital health care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
6.90%
发文量
156
期刊介绍: Sociology of Health & Illness is an international journal which publishes sociological articles on all aspects of health, illness, medicine and health care. We welcome empirical and theoretical contributions in this field.
期刊最新文献
Health inequalities and contemporary youth: Young people's accounts of the social determinants of health in an 'austere meritocracy'. Engaging with discursive complexities in mental health accessibility: Implications for acquired brain injury. Genetics, emotion and care: Navigating future reproductive decisions in families of children with rare genetic conditions. Positioning comfort measures in antenatal counselling for periviable infants. Family planning policy and gender in Nigeria: A thematic analysis of the government's health policy perspective.
×
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