IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v55y2002i10p1771-1777.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Clinical autonomy, individual and collective: the problem of changing doctors' behaviour

Author

Listed:
  • Armstrong, David

Abstract

Evidence-based medicine enables the profession to resist at least some of the challenges to its traditional autonomy: if informed doctors provide what is scientifically proven to be the best care there is less justification for external constraints. Yet, this defensive strategy depends on enforcing a new discipline within the profession such that individual practitioners accept mechanisms of external 'decision support' in their clinical practice. A study of the ways in which general practitioners in British Primary Care change their clinical behaviour shows that an emphasis on a 'patient centred' approach establishes an alternative individualised autonomy that seems inimical to the logic of evidence-based medicine. A tension therefore emerges between the maintenance of the autonomy of the profession as a collectivity through the promotion of a therapeutic rationality and the maintenance of the autonomy of the individual practitioner through the rhetoric of patient-centredness.

Suggested Citation

  • Armstrong, David, 2002. "Clinical autonomy, individual and collective: the problem of changing doctors' behaviour," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 55(10), pages 1771-1777, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:55:y:2002:i:10:p:1771-1777
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(01)00309-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:55:y:2002:i:10:p:1771-1777. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.