| Title |
Clinical intuition versus statistics: different modes of tacit knowledge in clinical epidemiology and evidence-based medicine
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, June 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11017-009-9106-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hillel D. Braude |
| Abstract |
Despite its phenomenal success since its inception in the early nineteen-nineties, the evidence-based medicine movement has not succeeded in shaking off an epistemological critique derived from the experiential or tacit dimensions of clinical reasoning about particular individuals. This critique claims that the evidence-based medicine model does not take account of tacit knowing as developed by the philosopher Michael Polanyi. However, the epistemology of evidence-based medicine is premised on the elimination of the tacit dimension from clinical judgment. This is demonstrated through analyzing the dichotomy between clinical and statistical intuition in evidence-based medicine's epistemology of clinical reasoning. I argue that clinical epidemiology presents a more nuanced epistemological model for the application of statistical epidemiology to the clinical context. Polanyi's theory of tacit knowing is compatible with the model of clinical reasoning associated with clinical epidemiology, but not evidence-based medicine. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 43% |
| Canada | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 43% |
| Scientists | 3 | 43% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 3% |
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 67 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 22% |
| Professor | 9 | 13% |
| Researcher | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 11% |
| Other | 16 | 22% |
| Unknown | 7 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 32% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 14% |
| Philosophy | 6 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 6% |
| Arts and Humanities | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 14 | 19% |
| Unknown | 11 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 July 2016.
All research outputs
#6,692,900
of 22,663,150 outputs
Outputs from Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics
#94
of 291 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,092
of 111,215 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,663,150 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 291 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 111,215 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them