Search

Your search keyword '"medical argumentation"' showing total 8 results
Start Over Descriptor "medical argumentation"
8 results on '"medical argumentation"'

1. The role of argumentative strategies in the construction of emergent common ground in a patient-centered approach to the medical encounter.

Author

Bigi, Sarah

Subjects
PATIENT-centered care, MEDICAL care, MEDICAL communication, INFORMATION sharing, ARGUMENT
Abstract

In this paper, argumentation practices will be discussed in view of their potential for favoring effective information sharing and the creation of 'emergent common ground', i.e. the common ground that is sought, created and co-constructed in the process of communication. Argumentation is usually tightly knit with information sharing: if the parties have not previously shared a sufficient amount of relevant knowledge, it is difficult for them to produce effective argumentation. Based on these premises, in this paper the argumentation stages of medical encounters will be viewed as opportunities to reveal and integrate insufficient common ground between clinicians and patients. By relying on the analysis of a corpus of real life encounters in a chronic care setting, the interaction between information sharing and argumentation will be shown, along with problematic cases of misunderstandings or ineffective argumentation due to lack of common ground. Implications for the clinical practice will be discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

2. The role of argumentative strategies in the construction of emergent common ground in a patient-centered approach to the medical encounter

Author

Bigi, Sarah Francesca Maria, Bigi, Sarah (ORCID:0000-0003-0506-6140), Bigi, Sarah Francesca Maria, and Bigi, Sarah (ORCID:0000-0003-0506-6140)

Abstract

In this paper, argumentation practices will be discussed in view of their potential for favoring effective information sharing and the creation of ‘emergent common ground’, i.e. the common ground that is sought, created and co-constructed in the process of communication. Argumentation is usually tightly knit with information sharing: if the parties have not previously shared a sufficient amount of relevant knowledge, it is difficult for them to produce effective argumentation. Based on these premises, in this paper the argumentation stages of medical encounters will be viewed as opportunities to reveal and integrate insufficient common ground between clinicians and patients. By relying on the analysis of a corpus of real life encounters in a chronic care setting, the interaction between information sharing and argumentation will be shown, along with problematic cases of misunderstandings or ineffective argumentation due to lack of common ground. Implications for the clinical practice will be discussed.

Published
2018

3. Challenges in argumentation and dialogue for autonomous, multi-party health coaching

Author

Snaith, Mark, Bedsted, Bjorn, Kotnis, Sita Ramchandra, Nielsen, Rasmus Øjvind, Beinema, Theresa Charlotte, Klaassen, Randy, and Pease, Alison

Subjects
medical argumentation, health coaching, Medical dialogue
Abstract

We examine in this abstract several key challenges related to the deployment of computational models of argument and dialogue in the context of multiparty health coaching.

Published
2018

5. The role of argumentative strategies in the construction of emergent common ground in a patient-centered approach to the medical encounter

Author

Sarah Bigi

Subjects
Linguistics and Language, Argumentative, Knowledge management, Process (engineering), Computer science, Settore L-LIN/01 - GLOTTOLOGIA E LINGUISTICA, 0603 philosophy, ethics and religion, Language and Linguistics, Argumentation theory, 03 medical and health sciences, 0302 clinical medicine, 030212 general & internal medicine, Chronic care, medical argumentation, business.industry, Communication, Information sharing, Common ground, 06 humanities and the arts, Clinical Practice, value judgments, 060302 philosophy, emergent common ground, business, activity types, Patient centered
Abstract

In this paper, argumentation practices will be discussed in view of their potential for favoring effective information sharing and the creation of ‘emergent common ground’, i.e. the common ground that is sought, created and co-constructed in the process of communication. Argumentation is usually tightly knit with information sharing: if the parties have not previously shared a sufficient amount of relevant knowledge, it is difficult for them to produce effective argumentation. Based on these premises, in this paper the argumentation stages of medical encounters will be viewed as opportunities to reveal and integrate insufficient common ground between clinicians and patients. By relying on the analysis of a corpus of real life encounters in a chronic care setting, the interaction between information sharing and argumentation will be shown, along with problematic cases of misunderstandings or ineffective argumentation due to lack of common ground. Implications for the clinical practice will be discussed.

Published
2018

6. A Demonstration of Multi-Party Dialogue Using Virtual Coaches: The First Council of Coaches Demonstrator

Subjects
Medical argumentation, ComputingMilieux_THECOMPUTINGPROFESSION, ComputerApplications_MISCELLANEOUS, Dialogue, Mixed-initiative dialogue, Coaching
Abstract

We demonstrate here the first Technical Demonstrator for Council of Coaches a project that is aiming to deploy a platform for virtual health coaching, and will incorporate computational models of argument and dialogue

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

8. Criteria for the reconstruction and analysis of doctors’ argumentation in the context of chronic care

Author

Dima Mohammed, Marcin Lewiński, Bigi, Sarah Francesca Maria, Labrie, Nanon, Bigi, Sarah Francesca Maria (ORCID:0000-0003-0506-6140), Dima Mohammed, Marcin Lewiński, Bigi, Sarah Francesca Maria, Labrie, Nanon, and Bigi, Sarah Francesca Maria (ORCID:0000-0003-0506-6140)

Abstract

The study of medical argumentation typically draws on empirical data. This poses a challenge, as in medical practice, utterances that serve an argumentative purpose are intertwined with utterances that serve different dialogical – as well as clinical – goals. Comprehensive understanding of the communicative context is thus imperative. This contribution seeks to provide a blueprint for the analysis of medical argumentation in context. Doing so, chronic care consultation is used as a particular example of doctor-patient interaction.

Published
2016

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results