ArticleStudies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences2020
A typology of clinical conditions.
Article in Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- What Is a Disease for Doctors? A Realist Thematic Qualitative Analysis of the Interpretation of Clinical Vignettes.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Covert consciousness.NeuroRehabilitation · 2024Article
- Two years on, a perspective on MAFLD.eGastroenterology · 2023Review
- Attributable mortality due to nosocomial sepsis in Brazilian hospitals: a case-control study.Annals of intensive care · 2023Article
- Disease definitions in respiratory and sleep medicine: changes in diagnostic criteria and categories over time and clinical implications.Breathe (Sheffield, England) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the philosophy of medicine, great attention has been paid to defining disease, yet less attention has been paid to the classification of clinical conditions. These include conditions that look like diseases but are not; conditions that are diseases but that (currently) have no diagnostic criteria; and other types, including those relating to risk for disease. I present a typology of clinical conditions by examining factors important for characterizing clinical conditions. By attending to the types of clinical conditions possible on the basis of these key factors (symptomaticity, dysfunction, and the meeting of diagnostic criteria), I draw attention to how diseases and other clinical conditions as currently classified can be better categorized, highlighting the issues pertaining to certain typology categories. Through detailed analysis of a wide variety of clinical examples, including Alzheimer disease as a test case, I show how nosology, research, and decisions about diagnostic criteria should include normative as well as naturalistically describable factors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.