How doctors think: clinical judgment and the practice of medicine

New York: Oxford University Press (2006)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

How Doctors Think defines the nature and importance of clinical judgment. Although physicians make use of science, this book argues that medicine is not itself a science but rather an interpretive practice that relies on clinical reasoning. A physician looks at the patient's history along with the presenting physical signs and symptoms and juxtaposes these with clinical experience and empirical studies to construct a tentative account of the illness. How Doctors Think is divided into four parts. Part one introduces the concept of medicine as a practice rather than a science; part two discusses the idea of causation; part three delves into the process of forming clinical judgment; and part four considers clinical judgment within the uncertain nature of medicine itself. In How Doctors Think, Montgomery contends that assuming medicine is strictly a science can have adverse side effects, and suggests reducing these by recognizing the vital role of clinical judgment

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Medical Decision-Making.Kazem Sadegh-Zadeh - 2011 - In Handbook of Analytic Philosophy of Medicine. Dordrecht, Heidelberg, New York, London: Springer.
Mechanisms in clinical practice: use and justification.Mark R. Tonelli & Jon Williamson - 2020 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 23 (1):115-124.
Pleasure in medical practice.Jean-Christophe Weber - 2012 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 15 (2):153-164.
A science of individuals: Medicine and casuistry.Kathryn Montgomery Hunter - 1989 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 14 (2):193-212.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
147 (#290,882)

6 months
25 (#409,042)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Evaluating evidence of mechanisms in medicine.Veli-Pekka Parkkinen, Christian Wallmann, Michael Wilde, Brendan Clarke, Phyllis Illari, Michael P. Kelly, Charles Norell, Federica Russo, Beth Shaw & Jon Williamson - 2018 - Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. Edited by Brendan Clarke, Phyllis Illari, Michael P. Kelly, Charles Norell, Federica Russo, Beth Shaw, Christian Wallmann, Michael Wilde & Jon Williamson.
A Plurality of Pluralisms: Collaborative Practice in Archaeology.Alison Wylie - 2015 - In Flavia Padovani, Alan Richardson & Jonathan Y. Tsou, Objectivity in Science: New Perspectives From Science and Technology Studies. Cham: Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science, vol. 310. Springer. pp. 189-210.

View all 121 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references