{"title":"For Decision-Making in Family Medicine Context is the Final Arbiter","authors":"J. Turabián","doi":"10.4172/2329-9126.1000E117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is a lack of knowledge about the diagnostic process in medical \n experts, and there is no clear consensus regarding its systematization \n in practice, teaching and evaluation. For the medical expert, clinical \n reasoning has become an ingrained form of thinking and is done \n \"without realizing\". The diagnostic process is a mental operation \n through which pathology is identified and the disease is evaluated. But \n the diagnosis is made by medical expert in a similar way as of the \n painter when he manages to highlight a figure on a background, when \n recognizing the edges by contrast, and so, only by observing colour in \n its context can you begin to understand its nature. For the family \n doctor, the same problem takes different forms according to its \n background. There are different diagnoses of the same symptom \n according to contexts. The professional intuition is sometimes \n marvellous and sometimes flawed. To map the boundary conditions \n that separate true intuitive skill from overconfident and biased \n impressions it should be based in the contextual evidence. The way to \n arrive at objective decisions is to contextualize. The complexity of \n family medicine lies in the contextualization of medical care in each \n patient.","PeriodicalId":90594,"journal":{"name":"Journal of general practice (Los Angeles, Calif.)","volume":" ","pages":"1-2"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of general practice (Los Angeles, Calif.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4172/2329-9126.1000E117","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
Abstract
There is a lack of knowledge about the diagnostic process in medical
experts, and there is no clear consensus regarding its systematization
in practice, teaching and evaluation. For the medical expert, clinical
reasoning has become an ingrained form of thinking and is done
"without realizing". The diagnostic process is a mental operation
through which pathology is identified and the disease is evaluated. But
the diagnosis is made by medical expert in a similar way as of the
painter when he manages to highlight a figure on a background, when
recognizing the edges by contrast, and so, only by observing colour in
its context can you begin to understand its nature. For the family
doctor, the same problem takes different forms according to its
background. There are different diagnoses of the same symptom
according to contexts. The professional intuition is sometimes
marvellous and sometimes flawed. To map the boundary conditions
that separate true intuitive skill from overconfident and biased
impressions it should be based in the contextual evidence. The way to
arrive at objective decisions is to contextualize. The complexity of
family medicine lies in the contextualization of medical care in each
patient.