A physician's self-paced guide to critical thinking / Milos Jenicek.

Format:

Book

Author/Creator:

Jenicek, Milos, 1935-

Language:

English

Subjects (All):

Medical logic.

Critical thinking.

Medicine--Philosophy.

Medicine.

Logic.

Philosophy, Medical.

Interprofessional Relations.

Physician-Patient Relations.

Thinking.

Medical Subjects:

Logic.

Philosophy, Medical.

Interprofessional Relations.

Physician-Patient Relations.

Thinking.

Physical Description:

xxiii, 229 pages : illustrations ; 23 cm

Place of Publication:

Chicago, Ill. : American Medical Association, [2006]

Summary:

Today's medicine is rooted in modern logical and critical thinking domains. A Physician's Self-Paced Guide to Critical Thinking explains and describes the applications of philosophy, logic and critical thinking in particular, in medicine. By presenting an organized view of medical professionals' experiences and endeavors, this resource will help to determine the success in treating patients and handling health problems at the community level. Designed to be a teaching tool, its self-instruction format is helpful as a resource or in a classroom setting. The author seeks to offer a structured outline of the fundamentals of informal logic and critical thinking as they apply to medical research, practice, and communication with the nonmedical world.

Within this text, readers will find: Clinical or community medicine practice scenarios - underline the relevance of messages for practice, research, or communication. Vignettes - summarize the basic terminology and definitions. In addition, organization charts, flowcharts, and summaries complement pertinent information. Exercises, questions, and puzzles - reinforce concepts and definitions. Extensive bibliography - lists traditional sources of original and expanded information, while also providing a selection of references to selected Web sites containing valuable information.

Contents:

A Word From the Author xvii

Chapter 1 Uses of Philosophy in Medical Practice and Research 1

1.1 Leitmotif and Core Concept 3

1.1.1 Logic 5

1.1.2 Critical Thinking and the Human Understanding Process 6

1.1.3 Note Concerning Critical Appraisal and Critical Thinking 7

1.1.4 Virtues of a Good Critical Thinker in Medicine: Desirable Knowledge, Attitudes, Skills 9

1.2 Basic Vocabulary and Definitions: Vignettes as Reminders and Summaries 11

1.2.1 Why So Many Definitions? 12

1.2.2 Overview of Frequently Used Terms in the Theory and Practice of Medicine and Their Definition 12

1.2.3 Basic Definitions of Philosophy and Logic in General and in Medicine 13

1.2.4 Basic Definitions of Mental Processes 13

1.2.5 Fundamental Definitions in Evidence-Based Clinical Medicine 14

1.2.6 Fundamental Definitions in Evidence-Based Preventive and Community Medicine and Public Health 15

1.2.7 Basic Terms in Biostatistics 16

1.2.8 Four Fundamental Branches of Philosophy Defined 16

1.2.9 Branches, Trends, Domains, and Applications of Philosophy of Special interest to Medicine 17

1.3 Exercises, Questions, and Puzzles 17

Exercise 1.3.1 Health Problems as Seen by Different Thinkers and Caregivers 18

Exercise 1.3.2 Risk Assessment in Epidemiology and Medicine as Seen by Philosophers/Logicians/Critical Thinkers 20

Exercise 1.3.3 Challenge and Problem of Diagnosis as Seen by Philosophers/Logicians/Critical Thinkers 22

Exercise 1.3.4 Treatment as Seen by Philosophers/Logicians/Critical Thinkers 24

Exercise 1.3.5 Prognosis and Ensuing Clinical Decisions as Seen by Philosophers/Logicians/Critical Thinkers 26

Exercise 1.3.6 Reasoning About a Clinical Problem in a Patient as Seen by Philosophers/Logicians/Critical Thinkers 29

Exercise 1.3.7 Assessment of a Clinical Message From a Colleague as Seen by Philosophers/Logicians/Critical Thinkers 30

1.4 Conclusions and Resolution of the Clinical Scenario 31

Chapter 2 Writing and Talking About Experiences and Research: Medical Articles and Scientific Communications as Arguments 43

2.1 Leitmotif and Core Concept 46

2.1.1 Arguments in Medicine as an Exercise in Critical Thinking 47

2.1.2 Vertical Thinking in Medical Problem Solving 48

2.1.3 Lateral Thinking in Medical Problem Solving 50

2.1.4 Types of Arguments 51

2.1.5 Other Graphical Visualizations as Tools to Improve Logical and Critical Thinking: Argument Maps and Concept Maps 60

2.1.6 A Note About Fallacies 64

2.2 Vignettes: Basic Vocabulary and Definitions, Synopses, Reminders, and Summaries 65

2.2.1 Fundamental Prerequisites and Assessment Criteria of the Cause-Effect Relationship 66

2.2.2 Basic Definitions of Argument and Argumentation in General, and of Argumentation in Medicine 67

2.2.3 Components of a "Classical" (Aristotle's) Categorical Syllogism 67

2.2.4 Basic Components of a "Modern" Argument (Toulmin's Model of Reasoning) 68

2.2.5 Expanded Components of Toulmin's Model for Original Research Studies of Causation in Medicine 68

2.2.6 Steps in the Reconstruction of a Categorical Syllogism From the Natural Language in Written or Spoken Messages in Medicine 70

2.2.7 Steps in the Reconstruction of the Modern (Toulmin's) Argument From the Natural Language in a Report of Research or Practical Clinical Experience 71

2.2.9 Differing Salient Characteristics of Vertical and Lateral Thinking 73

2.2.10 Steps in Critical Thinking About a Medical Problem 74

2.2.11 Critical Appraisal and Logic and Critical Thinking Appraisal 74

2.3 Critical Thinking About a Medical Research Article: Reconstructing Arguments From the Natural Language of Written or Spoken Medical Communication 75

2.4 Exercises, Questions, and Puzzles 81

Exercise 2.4.1 Vertical and Lateral Thinking in Research and in the Practice of Medicine 82

Exercise 2.4.2 Identifying Some Important Fallacies in Causal Reasoning 83

Exercise 2.4.3 Discussion and Conclusions in a Medical Article as an Exercise in Argumentation 87

Exercise 2.4.4 Research Grant Applications as a Practical Use of Argumentation 88

2.5 Conclusions: The Missing Link Leading to Critical Appraisal 90

Chapter 3 Sharing and Discussing Your Experiences With Colleagues and Other Health Professionals 101

3.1 Leitmotif and Core Concept 103

3.1.1 Dialogue Between Health Professionals as Argumentation 104

3.1.2 Overview of the Classical and Modern Arguments 105

3.1.3 Plain Daily Language in the Medical Argument 107

3.1.4 Note About Fallacies 109

3.2 Vignettes 110

3.2.1 Architecture of a Clinical Case Report With Possible Location of the Building Blocks of an Argument 111

3.2.2 Building Blocks of an Argument in the Clinician's Natural Language: An Example 113

3.3.3 Mental Processes, Types of Reasoning, and Pathways of Thinking Underlying Diagnosis Making 114

3.2.4 Paradigms, Mental Processes, Types of Reasoning, and Pathways of Thinking Underlying Risk Assessment in the Patient 114

3.2.5 Paradigms, Mental Processes, and Types of Reasoning Underlying Treatment Evaluation and Decisions Regarding a Patient 115

3.2.6 Paradigms, Mental Processes, and Types of Reasoning Underlying Prognosis Making in a Patient 115

3.3 Health Professionals Discussing Medical Articles: Two Illustrations 116

3.3.1 Discussing a Single Clinical Case 116

3.3.2 Discussing a Clinical Trial: Choosing Between Two New Technology Options in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Surgery 120

3.4 Other Exercises: Some Important Fallacies and How to Identify and Correct Them 122

3.4.1 Clinical Scenario 122

3.4.2 Question-Begging Expressions 123

3.4.3 Unwarranted Assumption Fallacies 123

3.4.4 Attraction to Novelties 123

3.4.5 Fallacy of Authority 124

3.4.6 Make Your Own Example and Try to Solve It 124

3.5 Possible Future Trends and Still Untested Territories of Logic in Medical Practice 124

Chapter 4 Talking to Patients and Patients Talking to Us: Clinical Consultation as Narrative and Argumentation 131

4.1 Leitmotif and Core Concept 134

4.1.1 Particularities of the Objectives of Physician-Patient Communication 134

4.1.2 Particularities of the Nature of Physician-Patient Communication 134

4.1.3 Clinical Consultation as a Logical Argument 135

4.1.4 Clinical Consultation as a Narrative 135

4.1.5 Patient-Physician Communication as a Source of Research and Better Understanding of Disease and Care 137

4.1.6 Argumentation as a Source of Diagnosis 138

4.1.7 Some Sources of Errors Affecting Patient-Physician Dialogue 138

4.1.8 Argumentation as a Way of Finding Errors in Clinical Practice 139

4.1.9 Note About Fallacies: Fallacious Arguments and Rhetorical Ploys in Physician-Patient Communication 139

4.2 Vignettes 140

4.2.1 Components of the Clinical Consultation as a Narrative and Argument 141

4.2.2 Purposes of Language Used by Physicians and Their Patients in Clinical Consultation 141

4.2.3 Components of Clinical Consultation as Parts of a Logical Argument 142

4.2.4 Consultation as a Narrative 142

4.2.5 Fallacies vs Rhetorical Ploys Defined 143

4.2.6 Physician Skills Needed for an Evidence-Based Medicine-Oriented Patient Consultation 143

4.3 Medical Article Illustrative of Challenges in Clinical Consultation (Seeing a Patient): Communicating Evidence for Participatory Decision Making 144

4.4 Other Exercises and Practical Problem Solving 147

Exercise 4.4.1 Overdoing It With Your Patient 148

Exercise 4.4.2 Trying to Impress Your Patient 149

Exercise 4.4.3 Your Patient Seeks Reassurance About Advertising 150

Exercise 4.4.4 Satisfying the Curiosity of Your Web-Surfing Patient Impressed by "Significance" 151

Exercise 4.4.5 Helping You and Your Patient Understand What Are You Talking About 153

Exercise 4.4.6 Explaining to the Patient His or Her Faulty Reasoning 155

Exercise 4.4.7 A "Because It Works" Fallacy and its "Because It Worked for Me" Offshoot 156

4.5 Conclusions: Future Research to Consider 158

Chapter 5 Discussing Health Problems With Outsiders: Law, Administration, Governments, and Other Stakeholders

in Public Health 161

5.1 Leitmotif and Core Concept 164

5.1.1 How We Define Things 164

5.1.2 Purposes of Argumentation 165

5.1.3 Various Argument Building Blocks 166

5.1.4 Argumentation Errors to Recognize, Consider, and Avoid, and Problems to Face 167

5.1.5 Challenges in Applying General Knowledge to Specific Patients and Situations 169

5.1.6 Examples of Challenges in the Understanding of and Decisions About Emerging Health Problems in the Contemporary World 170

5.1.7 Implications for Litigation and Other Communication and Exchanges of Information Within the General Community 172

5.1.8 Proposing, Defending, and Exchanging Information About Health Programs in the Community 173

5.1.9 Evidence Used 175

5.1.10 Fallacies in Legal and Other "Within-the-Community" Reasoning and Communication 175

5.2 Vignettes 176

5.2.1 What Do We Discuss in a "Case"? Health Topics as Argument Triggers 177

5.2.2 How Do We Define Evidence? 177

5.2.3 Definition of an Argument in Medicine 178

5.2.4 Steps in Thinking Critically 178

5.2.5 Which Building Blocks Can Be Hidden in Natural Language? 178

5.2.6 Syndrome vs Diagnostic Category of Disease Defined 179

5.2.7 Types of Dialogue and Exchanges of Ideas 179

5.2.8 Levels and Types of Prevention 180

5.2.9 Phases of a Health Program 180

5.2.10 Information Required for Meaningful Discussion on Priorities in Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary Prevention 181

5.3 Medical Articles as a Potential Tool in Communication With Community Stakeholders in Health: Challenges of Evidence in Health Tort Litigations 181

5.3.1 Understanding the Article As an Argument 182

5.3.2 Cause-Effect Relationship From an Epidemiological Standpoint 183

5.3.3 How Can Such Information Be Conveyed to Others? 183

5.3.4 How Relevant Might All This Be for Logicians and Critical Thinkers as Fundamentalists of Ways of Reasoning? 183

5.3.5 Were These "Negative Results," Confirming No Association Between Brain Cancer and the Use of Handheld Cellular Telephones, Worth the Trouble? 183

5.4 Exercises and Practical Problem Solving 184

Exercise 5.4.1 Modern Argument in Medicine Applied to a Public Health Program 185

Exercise 5.4.2 Role of the Health Professional as an Expert Witness at Courts of Law 187

Exercise 5.4.3 Defending the Value of a Medical Drug 189

Exercise 5.4.4 Explaining the Health Consequences of Exposure to a Dangerous Chemical in the Community 190

Exercise 5.4.5 Discussing Cases of Injury Presented to a Workers' Compensation Board 191

Exercise 5.4.6 Rhetorical Ploy as a Tool for Questioning the Credibility of an Expert Witness' Decisions 192

Exercise 5.4.7 Effects of an Accent Within a Message 193.

Notes:

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN:

1579477755

9781579477752

OCLC:

62341485