![]() The qualitative analysis reconstructs the logic underlying GPs’ diagnostic accounts, which centred on the meaning of diagnostic categories and on anticipating how ‘generalised others’ would respond to those meanings (called ‘diagnosing by anticipation’). The analysis suggests that GPs confer diagnoses by balancing unwarranted medical accuracy and anticipated harmful diagnostic consequences the goal of diagnosis was finding categories in the International Classification of Primary Care that would yield acceptable results, without making a liar of the GP in the process. Drawing on the distinction between diagnosis as colligation and classification, the findings and their relevance for medical sociology are discussed. Counter to frequent descriptions as ‘illness that cannot be diagnosed’, the analysis shows how GPs can diagnose MUS in the bureaucratic sense of diagnosis as classification – a sense that has been missing from sociological view. This article explores general practitioners’ (GPs’) perspectives on the diagnostic classification of medically unexplained symptoms (MUS). ![]() MUS refers to conditions that cannot be credibly established in biomedical terms and are considered unexplained by medical sciences. ![]() Classifying MUS is challenging work that complicates doctor-patient relationships (Arrelöv et al.įibromyalgia and myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) are renowned examples (cf. 2004) and explaining their condition (Hartman et al.Ģ013), not least because of difficulties in treating the patients (Lundh et al. The hallmark of MUS is that medical examination yields no biomedical evidence to corroborate the patient's symptoms (cf. Diagnosing MUS therefore requires GPs ‘to make judgements on the basis of something other than purely objective medical findings, contrary to their training’ (Mik-Meyer 2014: 13). This challenge is not unique to MUS: Symptoms without objective medical findings are ‘the commonest single category of complaints in general medical practice’ (Brown 2007: 773), and in that regard, MUS are typical. In other regards – such as being persisting, debilitating and widely contested conditions (Aronowitz 1998 Barker 2010 Brown 2007 Jutel 2010) – MUS differ from other ‘subjective complaints’ (e.g. In this article, MUS is used as a prism to understand the logic of diagnostic classification in situations where medical examination does not unilaterally indicate a diagnostic category, that is, when there are no strong medical warrants for choosing one category (e.g.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |