ArticleMedicine, health care, and philosophy2017
Rethinking critical reflection on care: late modern uncertainty and the implications for care ethics.
Article in Medicine, health care, and philosophy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- «Doctors must live»: a care ethics inquiry into physicians' late modern suffering.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2025Article
- Article
- Virtue and care ethics & humanism in medical education: a scoping review.BMC medical education · 2022Article
- Professional Medical Discourse and the Emergence of Practical Wisdom in Everyday Practices: Analysis of a Keyhole Case.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2020Article
- (In)visible materialities in the context of dementia care.Sociology of health & illness · 2020Article
- Fear, fight, familiarize: the experiences of people living with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and taking oral medication.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2019Article
- In search of good care: the methodology of phenomenological, theory-oriented 'N=N case studies' in empirically grounded ethics of care.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2019Article
- Practical wisdom in complex medical practices: a critical proposal.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2019Article
- The Mindful Body: A Phenomenology of the Body With Multiple Sclerosis.Qualitative health research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Care ethics as initiated by Gilligan, Held, Tronto and others (in the nineteen eighties and nineties) has from its onset been critical towards ethical concepts established in modernity, like 'autonomy', alternatively proposing to think from within relationships and to pay attention to power. In this article the question is raised whether renewal in this same critical vein is necessary and possible as late modern circumstances require rethinking the care ethical inquiry. Two late modern realities that invite to rethink care ethics are complexity and precariousness. Late modern organizations, like the general hospital, codetermined by various (control-, information-, safety-, accountability-) systems are characterized by complexity and the need for complexity reduction, both permeating care practices. By means of a heuristic use of the concept of precariousness, taken as the installment of uncertainty, it is shown that relations and power in late modern care organizations have changed, precluding the use of a straightforward domination idea of power. In the final section a proposition is made how to rethink the care ethical inquiry in order to take late modern circumstances into account: inquiry should always be related to the concerns of people and practitioners from within care practices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28332007What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.