Article published In:
Argumentation and HealthEdited by Sara Rubinelli and Francisca Snoeck Henkemans
[Journal of Argumentation in Context 1:1] 2012
► pp. 19–32
Edited by Sara Rubinelli and Francisca Snoeck Henkemans
[Journal of Argumentation in Context 1:1] 2012
► pp. 19–32
Institutional constraints on strategic maneuvering in shared medical decision-making
In this paper it is first investigated to what extent the institutional goal and basic principles of shared decision making are compatible with the aim and rules for critical discussion. Next, some techniques that doctors may use to present their own treatment preferences strategically in a shared decision making process are discussed and evaluated both from the perspective of the ideal of shared decision making and from that of critical discussion.
Cited by (13)
Cited by 13 other publications
Duarte, Antonio
2024. Epidemiology of Fallacies. Argumentation 38:3 ► pp. 329 ff. 
van Eemeren, Frans H., Bart Garssen & Nanon Labrie
Akkermans, Aranka, Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Nanon Labrie, Inge Henselmans & Hanneke van Laarhoven
2018. The stereotypicality of symptomatic and pragmatic argumentation in consultations about palliative systemic treatment for advanced cancer. Journal of Argumentation in Context 7:2 ► pp. 181 ff.
Pilgram, Roosmaryn & Francisca Snoeck Henkemans
2018. A pragma-dialectical perspective on obstacles to shared decision-making. Journal of Argumentation in Context 7:2 ► pp. 161 ff.
Vasilyeva, Alena L.
2017. Strategic maneuvering in dispute mediation. Argumentation and Advocacy 53:3 ► pp. 234 ff.
Labrie, Nanon H. M. & Peter J. Schulz
2015. The Effects of General Practitioners’ Use of Argumentation to Support Their Treatment Advice: Results of an Experimental Study Using Video-Vignettes. Health Communication 30:10 ► pp. 951 ff.
Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. & J. H. M. Wagemans
2015. Reasonableness in Context: Taking into Account Institutional Conventions in the Pragma-Dialectical Evaluation of Argumentative Discourse. In Reflections on Theoretical Issues in Argumentation Theory [Argumentation Library, 28], ► pp. 217 ff.
Zanini, Claudia, Piercarlo Sarzi-Puttini, Fabiola Atzeni, Manuela Di Franco & Sara Rubinelli
2015. Building bridges between doctors and patients: the design and pilot evaluation of a training session in argumentation for chronic pain experts. BMC Medical Education 15:1
Labrie, Nanon & Peter J. Schulz
2014. Does Argumentation Matter? A Systematic Literature Review on the Role of Argumentation in Doctor–Patient Communication. Health Communication 29:10 ► pp. 996 ff.
Labrie, Nanon & Peter J. Schulz
2015. Quantifying Doctors’ Argumentation in General Practice Consultation Through Content Analysis: Measurement Development and Preliminary Results. Argumentation 29:1 ► pp. 33 ff.
Rubinelli, Sara
2013. Rational versus unreasonable persuasion in doctor–patient communication: A normative account. Patient Education and Counseling 92:3 ► pp. 296 ff.
Rubinelli, Sara
2013. Argumentation as Rational Persuasion in Doctor-Patient Communication. Philosophy & Rhetoric 46:4 ► pp. 550 ff.
[no author supplied]
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.