IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v62y2006i9p2267-2278.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Doctor-patient interaction in a randomised controlled trial of decision-support tools

Author

Listed:
  • Rapley, Tim
  • May, Carl
  • Heaven, Ben
  • Murtagh, Madeline
  • Graham, Ruth
  • Kaner, Eileen F.S.
  • Thomson, Richard

Abstract

In this paper, we draw on the analytic perspectives of ethnomethodology to explore doctor-patient encounters in an experimental trial of a complex intervention: an efficacy randomised controlled trial (RCT) of decision-support tools in the UK. We show how the experimental context in which these encounters take place pervades the interactions within them. We argue that two interactional orders were at work in the encounters that we observed: (i) the ceremonial order of the consultation and (ii) the assemblage of the decision-support tool trial. We demonstrate how doctors in the trial oscillate between positions as authoritative clinician and neutralistic decision-support tool-implementer, and patients move between positions as passive recipients of clinical knowledge and as active subjects required to render their experience as calculable in terms of the demands of the decision-support tools and the broader trial they are embedded in. We demonstrate how the RCT coordinates the world of the clinical environment and the world of experimental evidence.

Suggested Citation

  • Rapley, Tim & May, Carl & Heaven, Ben & Murtagh, Madeline & Graham, Ruth & Kaner, Eileen F.S. & Thomson, Richard, 2006. "Doctor-patient interaction in a randomised controlled trial of decision-support tools," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(9), pages 2267-2278, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:62:y:2006:i:9:p:2267-2278
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(05)00537-X
    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. Armstrong, David, 1985. "Space and time in British general practice," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 20(7), pages 659-666, January.
    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. May, Carl, 2013. "Agency and implementation: Understanding the embedding of healthcare innovations in practice," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 26-33.
    2. Smith, Sian K. & Dixon, Ann & Trevena, Lyndal & Nutbeam, Don & McCaffery, Kirsten J., 2009. "Exploring patient involvement in healthcare decision making across different education and functional health literacy groups," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 1805-1812, December.
    3. Simon Dyson & Sue Dyson, 2014. "The Politics of Health Services Research: Health Professionals as Hired Hands in a Commissioned Research Project in England," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 19(3), pages 118-128, 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. Finlay, Susanna & Sandall, Jane, 2009. ""Someone's rooting for you": Continuity, advocacy and street-level bureaucracy in UK maternal healthcare," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1228-1235, October.
    2. Fraser, Alec & Baeza, Juan & Boaz, Annette & Ferlie, Ewan, 2019. "Biopolitics, space and hospital reconfiguration," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 230(C), pages 111-121.

    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:62:y:2006:i:9:p:2267-2278. 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.