Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28622609›Full record

ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2017

The strategic defense of physician autonomy: State public health agencies as countervailing powers.

Laura Senier, Rachael Lee, Lauren Nicoll

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Laura SenierDepartment of Sociology & Anthropology, Northeastern University, 360 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA, 02115, United States; Department of Health Sciences, Northeastern University, 360 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA, 02115, United States. Electronic address: l.senier@northeastern.edu.
Rachael LeeDepartment of Sociology & Anthropology, Northeastern University, 360 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA, 02115, United States.
Lauren NicollDepartment of Sociology & Anthropology, Northeastern University, 360 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA, 02115, United States.
Northeastern University · US

Funding

Barriers in Translating Genomic Research into State Public Health ProgramsK01HG006441 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI SENIER, LAURA · 2012 to 2016
$885k
NHGRI NIH HHS K01 HG006441
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Advances in genetic testing and the aggressive marketing of genetic tests by commercial diagnostic laboratories have driven both consumer demand and the need for unbiased information about how tests should guide healthcare delivery. This paper uses the countervailing powers framework to explore the role of state public health agencies as arbiters of quality and safety, specifically through their efforts to encourage physicians to follow evidence-based recommendations for screening for hereditary cancers. Social scientists have often viewed actions by the state to regulate cost, quality, or safety as a threat to physician autonomy. This paper draws on case studies from two US states-Michigan and Connecticut-to better understand the specific role of state public health agencies, and especially whether their activities to encourage adherence to evidence-based recommendations bolster or subvert the interests of other parties in the healthcare arena. We find that lacking authority to compel provider to follow evidence-based recommendations, they improvised ways to foster compliance voluntarily, for example, by emphasizing the role of the physician as gatekeeper, thus affirming the importance of physician autonomy and clinical judgment. Both states also used public health surveillance data to make rare diseases visible and illustrate gaps between recommendations and practice. Finally, they both showed that following evidence-based recommendations could align the professional and market interests of healthcare stakeholders. Both states employed similar strategies with similar effects, despite substantial differences in the regulatory climate and organizational capacity. Taken as a whole, their activities orchestrated a countervailing response that checked the profit-seeking motives of commercial laboratories. Our findings demonstrate that rather than eroding physician autonomy, state action to monitor healthcare quality and encourage adherence to evidence-based recommendations can actually reinforce physician authority.

Indexed as

Professional AutonomyState GovernmentConnecticutDiagnostic ServicesEvidence-Based PracticeGenetic TestingHumansMichiganPhysiciansPrivate SectorPublic Health PracticeUnited StatesCountervailing powersEvidence-based medicineGenetic testingHealth care qualityProfessional autonomyPublic health organizationsPublic health policyUnited States

Identifiers

PMID28622609
PMCPMC5531602
OpenAlexW2620616722

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.