Clark J A, Potter D A, McKinlay J B
New England Research Institute, Inc., Watertown, MA 02172.
Soc Sci Med. 1991;32(8):853-66. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(91)90241-4.
Although research in the past twenty years has resulted in an increasingly sophisticated understanding of clinical decision making processes, the dominant approach in this area of inquiry remains limited. Most studies emphasize normative models of how decisions ought to be made, others attempt to describe physicians' thinking, but few take the social context of decision making systematically into account. Research models typically assume that physicians are autonomous professionals practicing in socially insular clinical settings--an approach that is consistent with classic formulations of the social structure of medical practice, but they ignore 30 years of sociological research on research on patient-physician relationships and major historical changes in the structure of medical practice. Eisenberg's still timely advice to students of clinical decision making--that they need to describe decision making in the context of 'sociologic influences' (including patient, physician and practice setting characteristics)--is expanded in the present discussion. Recent studies are reviewed, highlighting important dimensions of social structure impinging on physicians' decision making. Findings indicate that the process of clinical decision making is likely influenced by patients' age, gender, socioeconomic status, and race, physicians' professional training and experience, as well as by larger structural features of organized clinical settings. Our review of these studies on the social context of clinical decision making, however, reveals major methodological limitations including those inherently imposed by secondary data analysis, normative approaches, written case vignettes, small, non-random samples and the inadequate control of confounding influences. We present a feasible, alternative research strategy, built on a factorial experimental design. Illustrative findings indicate how complex social structural influence on clinical decision making may be disentangled in an unconfounded manner.
尽管在过去二十年里,对临床决策过程的研究使得人们的理解日益精细复杂,但该研究领域的主流方法仍存在局限性。大多数研究强调决策应如何制定的规范模型,其他研究则试图描述医生的思维方式,但很少有研究系统地考虑决策的社会背景。研究模型通常假定医生是在社会孤立的临床环境中执业的自主专业人员——这种方法与医学实践社会结构的经典表述一致,但它们忽视了三十年来关于医患关系的社会学研究以及医学实践结构的重大历史变革。艾森伯格对临床决策专业学生仍具时效性的建议——即他们需要在“社会学影响”(包括患者、医生和执业环境特征)的背景下描述决策制定——在本讨论中得到了扩展。本文回顾了近期的研究,突出了影响医生决策的社会结构的重要维度。研究结果表明,临床决策过程可能受到患者的年龄、性别、社会经济地位和种族、医生的专业培训和经验以及有组织的临床环境的更大结构特征的影响。然而,我们对这些关于临床决策社会背景的研究的回顾揭示了主要的方法学局限性,包括那些由二手数据分析、规范方法、书面病例 vignettes、小样本、非随机样本以及对混杂影响控制不足所固有带来的局限性。我们提出了一种可行的替代研究策略,该策略基于析因实验设计。说明性研究结果表明,复杂的社会结构对临床决策的影响如何能够以无混杂的方式被理清。