数字的暴政:电子健康记录透明度如何影响患者的健康感知和与医生的对话

B. Kristensen, J. Brodersen, A. B. R. Joensson
{"title":"数字的暴政:电子健康记录透明度如何影响患者的健康感知和与医生的对话","authors":"B. Kristensen, J. Brodersen, A. B. R. Joensson","doi":"10.17157/mat.9.2.5529","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"All Danish adults have access to their electronic medical records on the e-health platform Sundhed.dk, which is intended as a means to empower patients. But what happens when patients see their paraclinical test results presented as numbers which are flagged as either ‘normal’ or ‘abnormal’? Based on fieldwork in general practices and consultations, and on observations of individuals living with chronic illnesses, we investigated how patients and physicians interpret and interact with such numerical values, creating, as we argue through the words of Gregory Bateson, ‘epistemological errors’. We show how health record transparency blurs the patient’s senses and understanding and makes it harder for them to interpret their state of health and to trust the clinical judgement of health professionals. We argue that the immediate access to test results triggers a runaway process in which numerical values (be they normal or abnormal in comparison with a standard point of reference) transform into a threat to life itself. As such, our ethnography underlines the intricate contradiction between the trust placed in biomedical sciences and the uncertainty involved in testing, diagnosing, and treating. Patients’ access to all test results leads to a quest for certainty—one never fully obtainable, which thus instead mobilises new uncertainties.","PeriodicalId":74160,"journal":{"name":"Medicine anthropology theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Tyranny of Numbers: How e-Health Record Transparency Affects Patients’ Health Perceptions and Conversations with Physicians\",\"authors\":\"B. Kristensen, J. Brodersen, A. B. R. Joensson\",\"doi\":\"10.17157/mat.9.2.5529\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"All Danish adults have access to their electronic medical records on the e-health platform Sundhed.dk, which is intended as a means to empower patients. But what happens when patients see their paraclinical test results presented as numbers which are flagged as either ‘normal’ or ‘abnormal’? Based on fieldwork in general practices and consultations, and on observations of individuals living with chronic illnesses, we investigated how patients and physicians interpret and interact with such numerical values, creating, as we argue through the words of Gregory Bateson, ‘epistemological errors’. We show how health record transparency blurs the patient’s senses and understanding and makes it harder for them to interpret their state of health and to trust the clinical judgement of health professionals. We argue that the immediate access to test results triggers a runaway process in which numerical values (be they normal or abnormal in comparison with a standard point of reference) transform into a threat to life itself. As such, our ethnography underlines the intricate contradiction between the trust placed in biomedical sciences and the uncertainty involved in testing, diagnosing, and treating. Patients’ access to all test results leads to a quest for certainty—one never fully obtainable, which thus instead mobilises new uncertainties.\",\"PeriodicalId\":74160,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medicine anthropology theory\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medicine anthropology theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17157/mat.9.2.5529\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicine anthropology theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17157/mat.9.2.5529","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

所有丹麦成年人都可以在电子保健平台Sundhed上查阅他们的电子医疗记录。Dk,这是一种赋予患者权力的手段。但是,当患者看到他们的临床测试结果被标记为“正常”或“异常”时,会发生什么呢?基于对一般实践和咨询的实地调查,以及对慢性疾病患者的观察,我们调查了患者和医生如何解释和互动这些数值,正如我们通过格雷戈里·贝特森(Gregory Bateson)所说的那样,创造了“认识论错误”。我们展示了健康记录的透明度如何模糊了患者的感觉和理解,使他们更难解释自己的健康状况,并相信卫生专业人员的临床判断。我们认为,对测试结果的直接访问触发了一个失控的过程,在这个过程中,数值(与标准参考点相比,无论它们是正常的还是不正常的)转变为对生命本身的威胁。因此,我们的人种志强调了对生物医学科学的信任与测试、诊断和治疗中涉及的不确定性之间复杂的矛盾。患者对所有检测结果的接触导致了对确定性的追求——一种永远无法完全获得的确定性,从而引发了新的不确定性。
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 Tyranny of Numbers: How e-Health Record Transparency Affects Patients’ Health Perceptions and Conversations with Physicians
All Danish adults have access to their electronic medical records on the e-health platform Sundhed.dk, which is intended as a means to empower patients. But what happens when patients see their paraclinical test results presented as numbers which are flagged as either ‘normal’ or ‘abnormal’? Based on fieldwork in general practices and consultations, and on observations of individuals living with chronic illnesses, we investigated how patients and physicians interpret and interact with such numerical values, creating, as we argue through the words of Gregory Bateson, ‘epistemological errors’. We show how health record transparency blurs the patient’s senses and understanding and makes it harder for them to interpret their state of health and to trust the clinical judgement of health professionals. We argue that the immediate access to test results triggers a runaway process in which numerical values (be they normal or abnormal in comparison with a standard point of reference) transform into a threat to life itself. As such, our ethnography underlines the intricate contradiction between the trust placed in biomedical sciences and the uncertainty involved in testing, diagnosing, and treating. Patients’ access to all test results leads to a quest for certainty—one never fully obtainable, which thus instead mobilises new uncertainties.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
72 weeks
期刊最新文献
Mapping Microbial Selves: Field Notes from a Dirty Parenting Project Relations as Immunity: Building Community Resilience How to Categorise Disease? Endometriosis, Inflammation, and ‘Self Out of Place’ The Immune System, Immunity and Immune Logics: Troubling Fixed Boundaries and (Re)conceptualizing Relations Pandemic Life-lines: A Multimodal Autoethnography of COVID-19 Illness, Isolation, and Shared Immunities
×
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