HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) In Brief TRACK Discussion: Submit a Comment TRACK Discussion: View Comments Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when TRACK Comments are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Thomas, P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Thomas, P. Related Collections Health policy Translational research Communication / decision making Research capacity building

General Medical Practitioners Need to Be Aware of the Theories on Which Our Work Depend

Centre for Study of Policy and Practice in Health and Social Care, Thames Valley University, Ealing, London

CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Paul Thomas, FRCGP, MD Westel House 32–38 Uxbridge Rd Ealing, London W5 2BS, UK Paul.Thomas{at}tvu.ac.uks

When general practitioners and family physicians listen, reflect, and diagnose, we use 3 different theories of knowledge. This essay explores these theories to highlight an approach to clinical practice, inquiry, and learning that can do justice to the complex and uncertain world we experience. The following points are made: (1) A variety of approaches to research and audit are needed to illuminate the richness of experience witnessed by general medical practitioners. (2) Evidence about the past cannot predict the future except in simple, short-term, or slowly changing situations. (3) We consciously or unconsciously weave together evidence generated through 3 fundamental theories of knowledge, termed postpositivism, critical theory, and constructivism, to make sense of everyday experience. We call it listening, reflecting, and diagnosing. (4) These 3 fundamental theories of knowledge highlight different aspects within a world that is more complex, integrated, and changing than any single theory can reveal on its own; they frame what we see and how we act in everyday situations. (5) Moving appropriately between these different theories helps us to see a fuller picture and provides a framework for improving our skills as clinicians, researchers, and learners. (6) Narrative unity offers a way to bring together different kinds of evidence to understand the overall health of patients and of communities; evidence of all kinds provides discrete snapshots of more complex stories in evolution. (7) We need to understand these issues so we can create an agenda for clinical practice, inquiry, and learning appropriate to our discipline.

Key Words: Epistemology • paradigm, primary health care • ontology • methodology • theory

This article has been cited by other articles:

				K. C. Stange On TRACK: Challenges and Insights Ann. Fam. Med, November 1, 2006; 4(6): 561 - 563. [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. C. Stange In This Issue: Capacity for Caring and Generating New Knowledge Ann. Fam. Med, September 1, 2006; 4(5): 386 - 388. [Full Text] [PDF]

TRACK Comments: