Labrie Nanon H M, Schulz Peter J
a Institute of Communication & Health , University of Lugano.
Health Commun. 2015;30(10):951-61. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2014.909276. Epub 2014 Sep 25.
In recent years, general practice consultation has often been characterized as an argumentative activity. It has been argued that, guided by the ethical and legal principle of informed consent and the ideal standards of participatory and evidence-based medicine, doctors should provide argumentative support for their recommendations in order to encourage patients to actively take part in the treatment decision-making discussion. Thus far, however, it has remained unclear what causal effect general practitioners' provision of argumentation may have on consultation outcomes, such as patients' perceptions of their doctors' decision-making style and credibility, their acceptance and recall of the medical advice, and subsequently their intention to adhere to the advice. In this study, therefore, the effect of general practitioners' argumentative support for their treatment recommendations is studied experimentally using scripted video-vignettes. Moreover, rather than focusing merely on the presence of argumentation, the role of the pragma-dialectical reasonableness of general practitioners' argumentation is also taken into account.
近年来，全科医疗咨询常常被视为一种论证活动。有人认为，在知情同意的伦理和法律原则以及参与式和循证医学的理想标准的指导下，医生应该为他们的建议提供论证支持，以鼓励患者积极参与治疗决策讨论。然而，到目前为止，全科医生提供论证对咨询结果可能产生何种因果效应仍不明确，比如患者对医生决策风格和可信度的看法、他们对医疗建议的接受和记忆，以及随后他们坚持该建议的意愿。因此，在本研究中，使用脚本视频短片对全科医生为其治疗建议提供论证支持的效果进行了实验研究。此外，本研究不仅关注论证的存在，还考虑了全科医生论证的语用辩证法合理性的作用。
