IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v29y1989i6p769-778.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What diagnosis does not tell: The case for a noncategorical approach to chronic illness in childhood

Author

Listed:
  • Stein, Ruth E.K.
  • Jessop, Dorothy Jones

Abstract

Medical training, practice and research are traditionally organized around body systems and disease categories. There is, however, a disciplinary split over the question of whether the clinical diagnosis is the central issue in describing an individual with an illness. Data from two studies, one institutional and one population based (The Pediatric Ambulatory Care Treatment Study and the National Health Examination Survey--Cycles II and III), are used to test the usefulness of diagnostic groupings in examining correlates of illness. A series of analyses of variance with the diagnostic groupings as the independent variable and a range of psychological, social and educational measures as the dependent variables reveal only the number of significant differences expected by chance. The only area in which a pattern of significant differences is found in the family's interaction with the health care delivery system. These results indicate that there is more variability within diagnostic groupings than between them and suggest that diagnosis is not a helpful categorization in the examination of psychological and social variables. While not surprising to social scientists, these data suggest the need for a major reorientation of the research paradigm when examining the psychological, social, rehabilitative and preventive issues raised by chronic illness in children and families.

Suggested Citation

  • Stein, Ruth E.K. & Jessop, Dorothy Jones, 1989. "What diagnosis does not tell: The case for a noncategorical approach to chronic illness in childhood," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 769-778, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:29:y:1989:i:6:p:769-778
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(89)90157-3
    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:29:y:1989:i:6:p:769-778. 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.