Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29973289›Full record

ArticlePhilosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM2018

Renewing Medicine's basic concepts: on ambiguity.

Joel Michael Reynolds

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. The concept of vulnerability in medical ethics and philosophy.Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM · 2019
    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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Joel Michael ReynoldsRice Family Fellow in Bioethics and the Humanities, The Hastings Center, 21 Malcolm Gordon Road, Garrison, NY, 10524-4125, USA. reynoldsj@thehastingscenter.org.ORCID 0000-0002-9640-5082
Hastings Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEdmund Pellegrino lamented that the cultural climate of the industrialized West had called the fundamental means and ends of medicine into question, leading him to propose a renewed reflection on medicine's basic concepts, including health, disease, and illness. My aim in this paper is take up Pellegrino's call. I argue that in order to usher in this renewal, the concept of ambiguity should take on a guiding role in medical practice, both scientific and clinical. After laying out Pellegrino's vision, I focus on the concept of normality, arguing that it undergirds modern medicine's other basic concepts. I draw on critiques by scholars in disability studies that show the concept of normality to be instructively ambiguous. Discussing the cases of Deafness and body integrity identity disorder (BIID), I argue that if medicine is to uphold its epistemic authority and fulfill its melioristic goals, ambiguity should become a central medical concept.

methodsIn this theoretical paper, I consider how central concepts in the philosophy of medicine are challenged by research on experiences of disability. In particular, the idea that medical knowledge produces universal truths is challenged and the importance of historical, cultural, and otherwise situated knowledge is highlighed.

resultsI demonstrate how experiences of disability complicate dominant theories in the philosophy of medicine and why medical practice and the philosophy of medicine should make ambiguity a central concept.

conclusionsIf medical practitioners and philosophers of medicine wish to improve their understanding of the meaning and practice of medicine, they should take seriously the importance and centrality of ambiguity.

Indexed as

Philosophy, MedicalDeafnessHumansPersons with DisabilitiesUnnecessary ProceduresAmbiguityBIIDDeafnessDisability studiesEdmund PellegrinoNormalityPatient-provider communicationPhilosophy of disabilityPhilosophy of medicine

Identifiers

PMID29973289
PMCPMC6032601
OpenAlexW2810505290

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.