In Defence of Professional Judgement.

Robin Downie, Jane Macnaughton
{"title":"In Defence of Professional Judgement.","authors":"Robin Downie, Jane Macnaughton","doi":"10.1192/apt.bp.108.005926","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A judgement is an assertion made with evidence or good reason in a context of uncertainty. In psychiatry the uncertainty is inherent in the professional context, and the evidence derives from the academic literature and scientific studies as they are applied to a specific patient. The nature of the uncertainty and the factors which should inform professional judgement are explored. Professional judgement is currently facing two serious challenges: an obsession with numbers, which comes from within medicine, and the 'patient choice' agenda, which is politically inspired and comes from outside medicine. This paper strives to defend professional judgement in the clinic against both challenges.</p>","PeriodicalId":89879,"journal":{"name":"Advances in psychiatric treatment : the Royal College of Psychiatrists' journal of continuing professional development","volume":"15 5","pages":"322-327"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3784818/pdf/emss-54179.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in psychiatric treatment : the Royal College of Psychiatrists' journal of continuing professional development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1192/apt.bp.108.005926","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A judgement is an assertion made with evidence or good reason in a context of uncertainty. In psychiatry the uncertainty is inherent in the professional context, and the evidence derives from the academic literature and scientific studies as they are applied to a specific patient. The nature of the uncertainty and the factors which should inform professional judgement are explored. Professional judgement is currently facing two serious challenges: an obsession with numbers, which comes from within medicine, and the 'patient choice' agenda, which is politically inspired and comes from outside medicine. This paper strives to defend professional judgement in the clinic against both challenges.

捍卫专业判断
判断是在不确定的情况下,根据证据或充分的理由做出的断言。在精神病学中,不确定性是专业背景所固有的,而证据则来自应用于特定病人的学术文献和科学研究。本文探讨了不确定性的性质以及专业判断应参考的因素。专业判断目前正面临着两个严峻的挑战:一是来自医学界内部的对数字的痴迷,二是来自医学界外部的受政治启发的 "患者选择 "议程。本文旨在捍卫临床中的专业判断,以应对这两种挑战。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信