Investigating the factors behind differences in ‘lay’ and ‘expert’ medical knowledge in the context of fever treatment in Yangon, Myanmar.

Onubha Hoque Syed
{"title":"Investigating the factors behind differences in ‘lay’ and ‘expert’ medical knowledge in the context of fever treatment in Yangon, Myanmar.","authors":"Onubha Hoque Syed","doi":"10.31273/REINVENTION.V14I1.732","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Greater social research aiming to understand the qualitative experiences of patients and healthcare workers is necessary in order to create informed health policies. A key aspect of this is acknowledging and uncovering how 'lay' and 'expert' medical knowledge interact and co-exist. This paper uses the context of fever treatment in Yangon, Myanmar, to investigate the factors behind differences between 'lay' and 'expert' medical knowledge.\nThis cross-sectional study conducts a deductive thematic analysis of secondary qualitative data from both patients and medical doctors using an adapted form of Amartya Sen’s capability approach framework. Results uncover how education, socially rooted collective knowledge and unregulated pharmacies drive differences between 'lay' and 'expert' medical knowledge.\nThe results of this paper highlight the interdisciplinary nature of health, meaning health systems should be considered within their sociological, political and economic contexts. Appreciating the complexity of how health is understood by populations can allow policymakers to form a stronger health system by creating contextualised policies and health interventions for the general public that cater to the diversity of narratives within health systems and beliefs.\n ","PeriodicalId":183531,"journal":{"name":"Reinvention: an International Journal of Undergraduate Research","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reinvention: an International Journal of Undergraduate Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31273/REINVENTION.V14I1.732","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Greater social research aiming to understand the qualitative experiences of patients and healthcare workers is necessary in order to create informed health policies. A key aspect of this is acknowledging and uncovering how 'lay' and 'expert' medical knowledge interact and co-exist. This paper uses the context of fever treatment in Yangon, Myanmar, to investigate the factors behind differences between 'lay' and 'expert' medical knowledge. This cross-sectional study conducts a deductive thematic analysis of secondary qualitative data from both patients and medical doctors using an adapted form of Amartya Sen’s capability approach framework. Results uncover how education, socially rooted collective knowledge and unregulated pharmacies drive differences between 'lay' and 'expert' medical knowledge. The results of this paper highlight the interdisciplinary nature of health, meaning health systems should be considered within their sociological, political and economic contexts. Appreciating the complexity of how health is understood by populations can allow policymakers to form a stronger health system by creating contextualised policies and health interventions for the general public that cater to the diversity of narratives within health systems and beliefs.  
在缅甸仰光发烧治疗的背景下,调查“普通”和“专家”医学知识差异背后的因素。
为了制定知情的卫生政策,有必要进行更多的社会研究,以了解患者和卫生保健工作者的质量经验。其中一个关键方面是承认和揭示“外行”和“专家”医学知识是如何相互作用和共存的。本文以缅甸仰光的发热治疗为背景,调查了“外行”和“专家”医学知识差异背后的因素。本横断面研究使用Amartya Sen的能力方法框架的改编形式,对来自患者和医生的次要定性数据进行演绎主题分析。研究结果揭示了教育、根植于社会的集体知识和不受监管的药店如何导致“非专业”和“专家”医学知识之间的差异。本文的结果突出了卫生的跨学科性质,这意味着应该在其社会学、政治和经济背景下考虑卫生系统。认识到人群对卫生的理解的复杂性,可以使政策制定者通过为公众制定符合背景的政策和卫生干预措施来形成一个更强大的卫生系统,以迎合卫生系统和信仰内部叙述的多样性。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信