The normativist-naturalist puzzle: Functions and assumptions of health assessment tools

Author:

Nielsen Thor Hennelund1,Nielsen Lasse1ORCID,Klausen Søren Harnow1

Affiliation:

1. University of Southern Denmark, Denmark

Abstract

While there is no shortage in discussions of health assessment tools, little is known about health professionals’ experience of their practical uses. However, these tools rely on assumptions that have significant impacts on the practice of health assessment. In this study, we explore health professionals’ experiences with health assessment tools, that is, how they define, use, and understand these tools, and whether they take them to measure health and wellbeing. We combine a qualitative, interview-based study of the uses and understandings of health assessment tools among Danish health professionals with a philosophical analysis of these applications and perceptions. Our study shows that contrary assumptions are involved in the use of the tools, to the extent that one can speak of a normativist-naturalist puzzle: health professionals generally apply a normativist conception of health, find health assessment useful and valuable for their clinical practice, but believe that what the tools measure is basically not health proper but some proximal entity of a more naturalist kind. This result demonstrates the complexity of health assessment tools and suggests that they are used with care to ensure both that particular tools are used for the kinds of tasks they are most apt for, and that they are put to use in awareness of their limitations.

Funder

University of Southern Denmark, Human Health

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Reference48 articles.

1. Health Problems

2. Patient reported outcome measures could help transform healthcare

3. A Rebuttal on Health

4. Broome J, Murray C, Salomon J, et al. (2002) Measuring the Burden of Disease by Aggregating Well-Being. Summary Measures of Population Health: Concepts, Ethics, Measurement and Applications. Geneva: World Health Organization, pp.91–113.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3