IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v68y2009i3p526-532.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When the standards aren't standard: Evidence-based medicine in the Russian context

Author

Listed:
  • Geltzer, Anna

Abstract

This paper examines the uses of evidence-based medicine (EBM) in post-Soviet Russia through the use of semi-structured interviews. It asks what it means to talk about practicing evidence-based medicine in a setting where the context of practice presents considerable barriers to the implementation of EBM principles. Drawing on interviews with Russian physicians, medical students and users of the healthcare system, the paper argues that in post-Soviet Russia EBM serves as a strategic discourse for segments of the medical profession. With the collapse of the U.S.S.R. the healthcare system has been going through a period of crisis, and Russian physicians are finding that they have to redefine their professional identity with respect to the domestic and the international context and have to seek new sources for legitimating their professional position. The western origins of EBM endow this rhetoric with considerable power in the Russian context and render it a very useful tool in the project of redefinition.

Suggested Citation

  • Geltzer, Anna, 2009. "When the standards aren't standard: Evidence-based medicine in the Russian context," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 526-532, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:68:y:2009:i:3:p:526-532
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(08)00561-3
    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. May, Carl & Rapley, Tim & Moreira, Tiago & Finch, Tracy & Heaven, Ben, 2006. "Technogovernance: Evidence, subjectivity, and the clinical encounter in primary care medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(4), pages 1022-1030, February.
    2. Cambrosio, Alberto & Keating, Peter & Schlich, Thomas & Weisz, George, 2006. "Regulatory objectivity and the generation and management of evidence in medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 189-199, July.
    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. Luck, J. & Peabody, J.W. & DeMaria, L.M. & Alvarado, C.S. & Menon, R., 2014. "Patient and provider perspectives on quality and health system effectiveness in a transition economy: Evidence from Ukraine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 57-65.
    2. Wu, Chia-Ling, 2012. "IVF policy and global/local politics: The making of multiple-embryo transfer regulation in Taiwan," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(4), pages 725-732.

    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. Timmermans, Stefan & Almeling, Rene, 2009. "Objectification, standardization, and commodification in health care: A conceptual readjustment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 21-27, July.
    2. Greenhalgh, Joanne & Flynn, Rob & Long, Andrew F. & Tyson, Sarah, 2008. "Tacit and encoded knowledge in the use of standardised outcome measures in multidisciplinary team decision making: A case study of in-patient neurorehabilitation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 183-194, July.
    3. Lawton, Julia & Jenkins, Nicholas & Darbyshire, Julie & Farmer, Andrew & Holman, Rury & Hallowell, Nina, 2012. "Understanding the outcomes of multi-centre clinical trials: A qualitative study of health professional experiences and views," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(4), pages 574-581.
    4. Taipale, Jaakko & Hautamäki, Lotta, 2021. "Clinical practice guidelines in courts’ representation of medical evidence and testimony," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 275(C).
    5. Gutin, Iliya, 2022. "Not ‘putting a name to it’: Managing uncertainty in the diagnosis of childhood obesity," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 294(C).
    6. May, Carl, 2013. "Agency and implementation: Understanding the embedding of healthcare innovations in practice," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 26-33.
    7. Hardman, Doug & Geraghty, Adam W.A. & Lown, Mark & Bishop, Felicity L., 2020. "Subjunctive medicine: Enacting efficacy in general practice," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 245(C).
    8. Bourgain, Catherine & Pourtau, Lionel & Mazouni, Chafika & Bungener, Martine & Bonastre, et Julia, 2020. "Imperfect biomarkers for adjuvant chemotherapy in early stage breast cancer with good prognosis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    9. Wibe, Torunn & Hellesø, Ragnhild & Slaughter, Laura & Ekstedt, Mirjam, 2011. "Lay people's experiences with reading their medical record," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(9), pages 1570-1573, May.
    10. Stella Pachidi & Hans Berends & Samer Faraj & Marleen Huysman, 2021. "Make Way for the Algorithms: Symbolic Actions and Change in a Regime of Knowing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(1), pages 18-41, January.
    11. 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.
    12. Shaw, Sara E. & Petchey, Roland P. & Chapman, Jenifer & Abbott, Stephen, 2009. "A double-edged sword? Health research and research governance in UK primary care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 912-918, March.
    13. Elstad, Emily A. & Lutfey, Karen E. & Marceau, Lisa D. & Campbell, Stephen M. & von dem Knesebeck, Olaf & McKinlay, John B., 2010. "What do physicians gain (and lose) with experience? Qualitative results from a cross-national study of diabetes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1728-1736, June.
    14. Andreassen, Hege K., 2011. "What does an e-mail address add? - Doing health and technology at home," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(4), pages 521-528, February.
    15. Paul Stenner & Raffaele De Luca Picione, 2023. "A Theoretically Informed Critical Review of Research Applying the Concept of Liminality to Understand Experiences with Cancer: Implications for a New Oncological Agenda in Health Psychology," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(11), pages 1-21, May.
    16. 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.
    17. Keshet, Yael & Popper-Giveon, Ariela, 2017. "Neutrality in medicine and health professionals from ethnic minority groups: The case of Arab health professionals in Israel," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 35-42.
    18. Assing Hvidt, Elisabeth & Grønning, Anette & Nisbeth Brøgger, Matilde & Møller, Jane Ege & Fage-Butler, Antoinette, 2021. "Multilevel structures and human agency in relation to email consultations: A strong structuration theory analysis of the Danish general practice setting," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 282(C).
    19. Ferlie, Ewan & Mcgivern, Gerry & FitzGerald, Louise, 2012. "A new mode of organizing in health care? Governmentality and managed networks in cancer services in England," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 340-347.
    20. Vololona Rabeharisoa, 2013. "Evidence-based activism: Patients’ organisations, users’ and activist’s groups in knowledge society," CSI Working Papers Series 033, Centre de Sociologie de l'Innovation (CSI), Mines ParisTech.

    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:68:y:2009:i:3:p:526-532. 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.