IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v15y2006i12p1489-1497.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Clinical judgement in the interpretation of evidence: a Bayesian approach

Author

Listed:
  • Jean Harbison

Abstract

Aim. This paper presents an argument for the use of Bayesian reasoning in considering the value of evidence in making nursing judgements. Background. Nursing has taken on board the drive towards evidence‐based practice. There has been little discussion, however, of how evidence should be interpreted. There is a growing interest in health care in the use of Bayesian reasoning for evidence interpretation, both in research and in clinical practice; as yet, there is a limited discussion in the literature of relevance to nursing. Objectives. To provide a short tutorial in the application of Bayes rule to a clinical judgement. To discuss the implications for practice of adopting a Bayesian perspective. Discussion. The relationship between evidence and clinical judgement is outlined. The need to accept uncertainty, and be equipped to deal adequately with this, is discussed: some basic ideas of probability are rehearsed. An outline of Bayesian reasoning is offered and a demonstration of the application of Bayes rule to a nursing judgement is presented. Relevance to practice. A rationale for adopting a Bayesian perspective on evidence interpretation is offered: namely the changing context of practice, with the blurring of professional boundaries and the need to articulate judgements, the avoidance of error and the opportunity to identify the appropriate areas for investigation in nursing.

Suggested Citation

  • Jean Harbison, 2006. "Clinical judgement in the interpretation of evidence: a Bayesian approach," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(12), pages 1489-1497, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:15:y:2006:i:12:p:1489-1497
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2005.01487.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2005.01487.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2005.01487.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adelswärd, Viveka & Sachs, Lisbeth, 1996. "The meaning of 6.8: Numeracy and normality in health information talks," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1179-1187, October.
    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. Solbjør, Marit & Skolbekken, John-Arne & Sætnan, Ann Rudinow & Hagen, Anne Irene & Forsmo, Siri, 2012. "Mammography screening and trust: The case of interval breast cancer," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(10), pages 1746-1752.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:jocnur:v:15:y:2006:i:12:p:1489-1497. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    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.