IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v60y2005i9p1975-1985.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Diversity in clinical guidelines: the role of repertoires of evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Moreira, Tiago

Abstract

Clinical practice guidelines are one of the main tools by which clinicians, policy makers and patients hope to make health care less variable, more reliable and efficient, but there is little understanding of the processes by which clinical guidance is put together by guideline groups. This paper describes the social organisation of knowledge within clinical practice guideline development processes by drawing on the sociology of situated judgement. Two guideline development processes were observed, and the development group meetings (N=21) recorded and analysed qualitatively. Data analysis suggested that clinical guidance comes to existence through the combination of repertoires of evaluation, organised around four different epistemic criteria: robustness, usability, acceptability and adequacy. This research provides a detailed and layered understanding of the knowledge dynamics involved in developing recommendations for appropriate health care for specific clinical circumstance.

Suggested Citation

  • Moreira, Tiago, 2005. "Diversity in clinical guidelines: the role of repertoires of evaluation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(9), pages 1975-1985, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:60:y:2005:i:9:p:1975-1985
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(04)00473-3
    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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wood, Martin & Ferlie, Ewan & Fitzgerald, Louise, 1998. "Achieving clinical behaviour change: a case of becoming indeterminate," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 47(11), pages 1729-1738, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alexander Schniedermann, 2021. "A comparison of systematic reviews and guideline-based systematic reviews in medical studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(12), pages 9829-9846, December.
    2. Moreira, Tiago, 2011. "Health care rationing in an age of uncertainty: A conceptual model," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(8), pages 1333-1341, April.
    3. France Légaré & Antoine Boivin & Trudy van der Weijden & Christine Pakenham & Jako Burgers & Jean Légaré & Sylvie St-Jacques & Susie Gagnon, 2011. "Patient and Public Involvement in Clinical Practice Guidelines," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 31(6), pages 45-74, November.
    4. Lehoux, Pascale & Daudelin, Genevieve & Demers-Payette, Olivier & Boivin, Antoine, 2009. "Fostering deliberations about health innovation: What do we want to know from publics?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2002-2009, June.
    5. Knaapen, Loes & Cazeneuve, Hervé & Cambrosio, Alberto & Castel, Patrick & Fervers, Beatrice, 2010. "Pragmatic evidence and textual arrangements: A case study of French clinical cancer guidelines," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(4), pages 685-692, August.
    6. Wieringa, Sietse & Engebretsen, Eivind & Heggen, Kristin & Greenhalgh, Trish, 2021. "Clinical guidelines and the pursuit of reducing epistemic uncertainty. An ethnographic study of guideline development panels in three countries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).
    7. Wilson, Nicky & Pope, Catherine & Roberts, Lisa & Crouch, Robert, 2014. "Governing healthcare: Finding meaning in a clinical practice guideline for the management of non-specific low back pain," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 138-145.
    8. Clinch, Megan & Benson, John, 2013. "Making information ‘relevant’: General Practitioner judgments and the production of patient involvement," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 104-111.
    9. Allen, Davina, 2009. "From boundary concept to boundary object: The practice and politics of care pathway development," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 354-361, August.
    10. Broom, Alex & Adams, Jon & Tovey, Philip, 2009. "Evidence-based healthcare in practice: A study of clinician resistance, professional de-skilling, and inter-specialty differentiation in oncology," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 192-200, January.
    11. Faulkner, Alex & Kent, Julie & Geesink, Ingrid & FitzPatrick, David, 2006. "Purity and the dangers of regenerative medicine: Regulatory innovation of human tissue-engineered technology," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(9), pages 2277-2288, November.
    12. Taipale, Jaakko & Hautamäki, Lotta, 2021. "Clinical practice guidelines in courts’ representation of medical evidence and testimony," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 275(C).
    13. Bourret, Pascale & Keating, Peter & Cambrosio, Alberto, 2011. "Regulating diagnosis in post-genomic medicine: Re-aligning clinical judgment?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(6), pages 816-824, September.

    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. Rhodes, Tim, 2018. "The becoming of methadone in Kenya: How an intervention's implementation constitutes recovery potential," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 201(C), pages 71-79.
    2. Lambert, Helen, 2006. "Accounting for EBM: Notions of evidence in medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(11), pages 2633-2645, June.
    3. Mykhalovskiy, Eric & Armstrong, Pat & Armstrong, Hugh & Bourgeault, Ivy & Choiniere, Jackie & Lexchin, Joel & Peters, Suzanne & White, Jerry, 2008. "Qualitative research and the politics of knowledge in an age of evidence: Developing a research-based practice of immanent critique," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 195-203, July.
    4. Rhodes, Tim & Lancaster, Kari, 2019. "Evidence-making interventions in health: A conceptual framing," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 238(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Prosser, Helen & Walley, Tom, 2006. "New drug prescribing by hospital doctors: The nature and meaning of knowledge," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(7), pages 1565-1578, April.
    6. King, Gillian & Currie, Melissa & Smith, Linda & Servais, Michelle & McDougall, Janette, 2008. "A framework of operating models for interdisciplinary research programs in clinical service organizations," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 160-173, May.
    7. Rashidian, Arash & Eccles, Martin P. & Russell, Ian, 2008. "Falling on stony ground A qualitative study of implementation of clinical guidelines' prescribing recommendations in primary care," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 148-161, February.
    8. John Boswell, 2014. "‘Hoisted with our own petard’: evidence and democratic deliberation on obesity," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 47(4), pages 345-365, December.

    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:60:y:2005:i:9:p:1975-1985. 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 (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.