Abstract
Clinical decision making can be described as answering one question: “What is the best next thing for this patient at this time?” In addition to incorporating clinical information, research evidence, and patient preferences, the process requires considering contextual factors that are unique to each patient and relevant to their care. The failure to do so, thereby compromising that care, can be called a “contextual error.” Although proponents of evidence-based clinical decision making and many scholars of the medical interview emphasize the importance of individualizing care, no operational definition is provided for the concept, nor is any methodology proposed for the interpretation of clinically relevant patient-specific variables. By conceptualizing the physician-patient encounter as a participant-observer case study with an N of 1, this essay describes how existing approaches to studying social systems can provide clinicians with a systematic approach to individualizing their clinical decision making.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Haynes RB, Devereaux PJ, Guyatt GH. Clinical expertise in the era of evidence-based medicine and patient choice. ACP J Club. 2002;136:A13.
Haynes RB, Devereaux PJ, Guyatt GH. Physicians’ and patients’ choices in evidence-based practice. BMJ. 2002;324:1350.
Engel GL. The need for a new medical model: a challenge for biomedicine. Science. 1977;196:1130.
Engel GL. The clinical application of the biopsychosocial model. Am J Psychiatry. 1980;137:535–44.
McDaniel SH, Campbell TL, Seaburn DB. Family-Oriented Primary Care: A Manual for Medical Providers. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 1990.
Hojat M, Mangione S, Gonnella JS, Nasca T, Veloski JJ, Kane G. Empathy in medical education and patient care. Acad Med. 2001;76:669.
Charon R. The patient-physician relationship. Narrative medicine: a model for empathy, reflection, profession, and trust. JAMA. 2001;286:1897–902.
Halpern J. From Detached Concern to Empathy: Humanizing Medical Practice. New York: Oxford University Press; 2001.
Suchman AL, Markakis K, Beckman HB, Frankel R. A model of empathic communication in the medical interview. JAMA. 1997;277:678–82.
Maguire P, Pitceathly C. Key communication skills and how to acquire them. BMJ. 2002;325:697–700.
Stewart M, Brown JB, Weston WW, McWhinney IR, McWilliam CL, Freeman TR. Patient-Centered Medicine: Transforming the Clinical Method. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications; 1995.
Epstein RM. The science of patient-centered care. J Fam Pract. 2000;49:805–7.
Bird J, Cohen-Cole SA. The three-function model of the medical interview. An educational device. Adv Psychosom Med. 1990;20:65–88.
Lipkin MJ, Putnam SM, Lazare A. The Medical Interview Clinical Care Education and Research. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 1995.
Nguyen NT, Goldman C, Rosenquist CJ, et al. Laparoscopic versus open gastric bypass: a randomized study of outcomes, quality of life, and costs. Ann Surg. 2001;234:279–91.
Keeney RL, Raiffa H. Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Trade-offs. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press; 1993:17.
Chapman GB, Sonnenberg FA. Decision Making in Health Care Theory Psychology and Applications. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press; 2000:313–26.
Glaser B, Strauss AL. The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Chicago: Aldine; 1967.
Strauss AL, Corbin J. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications; 1998.
Malterud K. Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet. 2001;358:483–8.
Patton MQ. Enhancing the quality and credibility of qualitative analysis. Health Serv Res. 1999;24:1192–7.
Levinson W, Gorawara-Bhat R, Lamb J. A study of patient clues and physician responses in primary care and surgical settings. JAMA. 2000;277:1021–7.
Devers KJ. How will we know ‘good’ qualitative research when we see it? Beginning the dialogue in health services research. Health Serv Res. 1999;24:1153–88.
Balint M. The Doctor, His Patient and the Illness. New York, NY: International Universities Press; 1957.
Epstein RM. Mindful practice. JAMA. 1999;282:833–9.
Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, eds. Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications; 2000.
Kerr M. Multigenerational family systems theory of Bowen and its application. In: Sholevar GP, ed. Textbook of Family and Couples Therapy: Clinical Applications. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc.; 2003.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Dr. Weiner received support from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Generalist Physician Faculty Scholars Program.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Weiner, S.J. Contextualizing medical decisions to individualize care. J GEN INTERN MED 19, 281–285 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30261.x
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30261.x