TY - JOUR
T1 - Reasonableness, credibility, and clinical disagreement
AU - Walker, Mary Jean
AU - Rogers, Wendy A.
PY - 2017/2
Y1 - 2017/2
N2 - Evidence in medicine can come from more or less trustworthy sources and be produced by more or less reliable methods, and its interpretation can be disputed. As such, it can be unclear when disagreements in medicine result from different, but reasonable, interpretations of the available evidence and when they result from unreasonable refusals to consider legitimate evidence. In this article, we seek to show how assessments of the relevance and implications of evidence are typically affected by factors beyond that evidence itself, such as our beliefs about the credibility of the speaker or source of the evidence. In evaluating evidence, there is thus a need for reflective awareness about why we accept or dismiss particular claims.
AB - Evidence in medicine can come from more or less trustworthy sources and be produced by more or less reliable methods, and its interpretation can be disputed. As such, it can be unclear when disagreements in medicine result from different, but reasonable, interpretations of the available evidence and when they result from unreasonable refusals to consider legitimate evidence. In this article, we seek to show how assessments of the relevance and implications of evidence are typically affected by factors beyond that evidence itself, such as our beliefs about the credibility of the speaker or source of the evidence. In evaluating evidence, there is thus a need for reflective awareness about why we accept or dismiss particular claims.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85015601401&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://purl.org/au-research/grants/arc/CE140100012
U2 - 10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.2.stas1-1702
DO - 10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.2.stas1-1702
M3 - Article
C2 - 28225698
AN - SCOPUS:85015601401
SN - 2376-6980
VL - 19
SP - 176
EP - 182
JO - AMA Journal of Ethics
JF - AMA Journal of Ethics
IS - 2
ER -