{"title":"Pellegrino and Thomasma's Anatomy of Clinical Judgments Revisited.","authors":"Michael Trimble, Pat Croskerry","doi":"10.1093/jmp/jhaf029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In 1981, Edmund Pellegrino and David Thomasma published A Philosophical Basis of Medical Practice. In this work, they situated the process of clinical judgment in the clinical encounter between an individual doctor and their patient. The encounter revolves around three questions: What can be wrong? What can be done? And what should be done for this patient? They analyzed the complete process of clinical reasoning involving both technical and ethical aspects. Pellegrino and Thomasma's subsequent work focused more on professionalism and ethics, while more recent analysis of clinical decision-making has been in the realm of psychology rather than along philosophical lines, particularly in the use of dual-process theory. Here we seek to review Pellegrino and Thomasma's analysis and to reintegrate the technical and ethical aspects of clinical reasoning.</p>","PeriodicalId":47377,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medicine and Philosophy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","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/jhaf029","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
In 1981, Edmund Pellegrino and David Thomasma published A Philosophical Basis of Medical Practice. In this work, they situated the process of clinical judgment in the clinical encounter between an individual doctor and their patient. The encounter revolves around three questions: What can be wrong? What can be done? And what should be done for this patient? They analyzed the complete process of clinical reasoning involving both technical and ethical aspects. Pellegrino and Thomasma's subsequent work focused more on professionalism and ethics, while more recent analysis of clinical decision-making has been in the realm of psychology rather than along philosophical lines, particularly in the use of dual-process theory. Here we seek to review Pellegrino and Thomasma's analysis and to reintegrate the technical and ethical aspects of clinical reasoning.
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.