ArticleJournal of patient experience2024
Experiential Fallibilism and Decision-Making Process: A Perspective from a Patient with Chronic Kidney Disease.
Article in Journal of patient experience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patient choice in healthcare follows a process in which references to evidence and experience are intertwined. From the perspective of a patient with chronic kidney disease, I propose experiential fallibilism as the use of uncertain evidence and experience, along with knowledge gained in new contexts, situations, and experiences, to attain truth and promote shared decision-making. Thus, because of their uncertain nature, both the patient's experience and the doctor's focus on evidence should be integrated into a decision-making process through a co-learning perspective so that they can mutually enrich each other and prevent inappropriate actions and decisions in other clinical contexts. The risks perceived by both the patient and the doctor should be valued equally to encourage an honest discussion of the benefits and drawbacks of the proposed treatments after considering the patient's social, economic, and medical situation. Further, experience measurement tools, both quantitative and qualitative, should be used or developed to test their transferability and effectiveness in contexts involving healthcare decisions between doctors and patients.
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.