Through the clinician's lens: Objective and subjective views of disability

Qualitative Health Research

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 17-29

  Stineman, Margaret G ^a   Rist, Pamela M ^a,b   Burke, Janice P ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^c THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Disabled persons; Grounded theory; Health care professionals; Health concepts; Imagination; Mixed methods; Moral perspectives; Phenomenology; Recovery; Rehabilitation; Values

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO ILLNESS; CLASSIFICATION; CLINICAL PRACTICE; DISABILITY; DISABLED PERSON; FEMALE; GROUNDED THEORY; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; NARRATIVE; PATIENT CARE; PERSONAL EXPERIENCE; PHENOMENOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE; REHABILITATION CARE; SIMULATION;

ADULT; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; DISABLED PERSONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH;

EID: 57749174885     PISSN: 10497323     EISSN: 15527557     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1049732308327853     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Barry, C.A., Stevenson, F.A., Britten, N., Barber, N., & Bradley, C.P. (2001). Giving voice to the lifeworld. More humane, more effective medical care? A qualitative study of doctor-patient communication in general practice. Social Science & Medicine, 54, 487-505.
2. Benner, P., & Tanner, C. (1987). Clinical judgment: How expert nurses use intuition. American Journal of Nursing, 87(1), 23-31.
3. Cohn, E.S. (1989). Fieldwork education: Shaping a foundation for clinical reasoning. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 43(4), 240-244.
4. Coles, R. (1989). The call of stories. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
5. Creswell, J.W., Fetters, M.D., & Ivankova, N.V. (2004). Designing a mixed methods study in primary care. Annals of Family Medicine, 2(1), 7-12.
6. Crow, L. (Ed.). (1996). Chapter 4: Including all of our lives: Renewing the social model of disability. In Exploring the divide. Leeds: Disability Press.
7. Dreyfus, H. (1986). Mind over machine: The power of human intuition and expertise in the ear of the computer. New York: Free Press.
8. Feffer, M., & Jahelka, M. (1968). Implications of the decentering concept for the structuring of projective content. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 32(4), 434-441.
9. Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
10. Good, B.J., & DelVecchio Good, M.J. (2000). "Fiction" and "historicity" in doctors' stories: Social and narrative dimensions of learning medicine. In C. M. L. C. Garro (Ed.), Narrative and the cultural construction of illness and healing (pp. 50-69). Berkeley: University of California Press
11. Good, M., & Good, B. (1989). Disabling practitioners: Hazards of learning to be a doctor in American medical education. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 59(2), 303-309.
12. Granger, C.V., Hamilton, B.B., Keith, R.A., Zielezny, M., & Sherwin, F. (1986). Advances in functional assessment for medical rehabilitation. Topics in Geriatric Rehabilitation, 1, 59-74.
13. Hamilton, B.B., Granger, C.V., Sherwin, F.S., Zielezny, M., & Tashman, J.S. (1987). A uniform national data system for medical rehabilitation. In M. J. Fuhrer (Ed.), Rehabilitation outcomes: Analysis and measurement. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
14. Jensen, G.M., Shepard, K.F., & Hack, L.M. (1990). The novice versus the experienced clinician: Insights into the work of the physical therapist. Physical Therapy, 70(5), 314-323.
15. Klienman, A. (1980). Patients and healers in the context of culture. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
16. Kurz, A.E., Saint-Louis, N., Burke, J.P., & Stineman, M.G. (2008). Exploring the personal reality of disability and recovery: A tool for empowering the rehabilitation process. Qualitative Health Research, 18(1), 90-105.
17. Lutz, B.J., & Bowers, B.J. (2005). Disability in everyday life. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 1037-1054.
18. Mattingly, C., & Fleming, M.H. (1994). Clinical reasoning forms of inquiry in a therapeutic practice. Philadelphia: F.A. Davis.
19. National Institutes of Health Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research. (1999). Qualitative methods in health research: Opportunities and considerations in application and review, organized by the NIH culture and qualitative research interest group. Retrieved October 18, 2004, from http://obssr.od.nih.gov/Documents/Publications/Qualitative.PDF
20. Neistadt, M.E., & Seymour, S.G. (1995). Treatment activity preferences of occupational therapists in adult physical dysfunction settings. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 49(5), 437-443.
21. Polanyi, M. (1967). The tacit dimension. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
22. Qualis Research Associates. (2001). Ethnograph Version 5.08 [computer software]. Available from www.QualisResearch.com
23. Rist, P., Freas, D., Maislin, G., & Stineman, G. (2008). An analysis of recovery preference exploration: Rehabilitation professionals' beliefs about recovery. Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 89, 1600-1606.
24. Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
25. Sox, H.C., Blatt, M.A., Higgins, M.C., & Marton, K.I. (1988). Medical decision making. Boston: Butterworth.
26. Stewart, D., & Mickunas, A. (1990). Exploring phenomenology: A guide to the field and its literature. Athens: Ohio University Press.
27. Stineman, M.G. (2000). Medical humanism and empowerment in medicine. Disability Studies Quarterly, 20(1), 11-16.
28. Stineman, M.G. (2001). A model of health environmental integration. Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation, 8(2), 34-45.
29. Stineman, M.G., Maislin, G., Nosek, M., Fiedler, R., & Granger, C.V. (1998). Comparing consumer and clinician values for alternative functional states: Application of a new feature trade-off consensus building tool. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 79, 1522-1529.
30. Stineman, M.G., Ross, R.N., Maislin, G., & Gray, D. (2007). Population-based study of home accessibility features and the activities of daily living: Clinical and policy implications. Disability & Rehabilitation, 29, 1165-1175.
31. Stineman, M.G., Ross, R.N., Maislin, G., Marchuk, N., Hijirida, S., & Weiner, M. (2007). Recovery preference exploration. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 86(4), 272-281.
32. Van de Ven, A.H., & Delbecq, A.L. (1972). The nominal group as a research instrument for exploratory health studies. American Journal of Public Health, 62(3), 337-342.
33. Whitman, N. (1993). A review of constructivism: Understanding and using a relatively new theory. Family Medicine, 25(8), 517-521.
34. World Health Organization. (2001). International classification of functioning, disability and health: ICF. Geneva: Author.