IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v114y2014i2p128-138.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Revalidation: Patients or process? Analysis using visual data

Author

Listed:
  • Guillemin, Marilys
  • Archer, Julian
  • Nunn, Suzanne
  • de Bere, Samantha Regan

Abstract

Revalidation is a significant recent regulatory policy reform from the UK General Medical Council and being considered elsewhere around the world. The policy aims to regulate licensed doctors to ensure that they are ‘up-to-date and fit-to practise’. Fundamental to the policy is that the revalidation of doctors should benefit patients and improve doctor–patient relationships. As part of an evaluation of the development of revalidation, 31 policy makers involved in its development were interviewed in 2010–2011 and were asked to draw what revalidation meant to them. From this, 29 drawings were produced and this article focuses on their analysis. The drawings emphasised abstract systems and processes, with a distinct lack of interpersonal interactions or representation of individual patients and doctors. Only 3 of the 29 images included individual patients and doctors. This depersonalisation of policy is examined with respect to the purported key objective of revalidation to benefit patients. Using a distinctively different modality, the drawings serve to confirm the two key discourses of regulation and professionalism prevalent in the interview data, while highlighting the notable absence of the patient. The benefits and limitations of using drawings as a research method are discussed for a health policy context.

Suggested Citation

  • Guillemin, Marilys & Archer, Julian & Nunn, Suzanne & de Bere, Samantha Regan, 2014. "Revalidation: Patients or process? Analysis using visual data," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(2), pages 128-138.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:114:y:2014:i:2:p:128-138
    DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2013.12.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851013003175
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.healthpol.2013.12.006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dixon-Woods, Mary & Yeung, Karen & Bosk, Charles L., 2011. "Why is UK medicine no longer a self-regulating profession? The role of scandals involving “bad apple” doctors," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(10), pages 1452-1459.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michał Krawczyk & Krzysztof Szczygielski, 2019. "Do professions curb free-riding? An experiment," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 361-376, June.
    2. James Arthur & Stephen R. Earl & Aidan P. Thompson & Joseph W. Ward, 2021. "The Value of Character-Based Judgement in the Professional Domain," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 169(2), pages 293-308, March.
    3. McGivern, Gerry & Nzinga, Jacinta & English, Mike, 2017. "‘Pastoral practices’ for quality improvement in a Kenyan clinical network," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 115-122.
    4. Ong, Bie Nio & Morden, Andrew & Brooks, Lauren & Porcheret, Mark & Edwards, John J. & Sanders, Tom & Jinks, Clare & Dziedzic, Krysia, 2014. "Changing policy and practice: Making sense of national guidelines for osteoarthritis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 101-109.
    5. Szczygielski, Krzysztof, 2022. "A model of competitive self-regulation," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    6. Bryce, Marie & Luscombe, Kayleigh & Boyd, Alan & Tazzyman, Abigail & Tredinnick-Rowe, John & Walshe, Kieran & Archer, Julian, 2018. "Policing the profession? Regulatory reform, restratification and the emergence of Responsible Officers as a new locus of power in UK medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 98-105.
    7. Jane Hendy & Danielle A. Tucker, 2021. "Public Sector Organizational Failure: A Study of Collective Denial in the UK National Health Service," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 172(4), pages 691-706, September.
    8. Price, Tristan & Tredinnick-Rowe, John & Walshe, Kieran & Tazzyman, Abigail & Ferguson, Jane & Boyd, Alan & Archer, Julian & Bryce, Marie, 2020. "Reviving clinical governance? A qualitative study of the impact of professional regulatory reform on clinical governance in healthcare organisations in England," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(4), pages 446-453.
    9. Byrne Catherine, 2016. "Ready or not? Statutory registration, regulation and continuing professional development for social care workers in Ireland," Administration, Sciendo, vol. 64(2), pages 9-29, August.
    10. Dewan, Yasir, 2019. "Corporate crime and punishment : The role of status and ideology," Other publications TiSEM 08d87b94-7449-4a1f-a3ae-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    11. Tarrant, Carolyn & Leslie, Myles & Bion, Julian & Dixon-Woods, Mary, 2017. "A qualitative study of speaking out about patient safety concerns in intensive care units," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 8-15.
    12. Hunter, Benjamin M. & Murray, Susan F. & Marathe, Shweta & Chakravarthi, Indira, 2022. "Decentred regulation: The case of private healthcare in India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).

    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:hepoli:v:114:y:2014:i:2:p:128-138. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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 or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    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.