Click here to get an A+ paper at a Discount
Subject: Psychology
I have a question that needs to be answered. The answer supposed to be mostly our own thoughts.
Question: what is our "clinical judgment" rationale for ignoring an approach that has been shown to work with a certain disorder to choose something that has little or no evidence (beyond anecdotal) of being effective for a certain presenting problem – regardless of how bias one might think the research is? Is it comfortability, agency philosophy, intuition, what you hope will work, what you have been told will work, faith, conformity, personal preference, authority, tradition, superstition, or something else and why?
“What standard would you want a physician to use if they were doing brain surgery on someone you loved – what the science has shown to work, or something with not as much demonstrated validity but the physician was more comfortable with?”
Question: what is our "clinical judgment" rationale for ignoring an approach that has been shown to work with a certain disorder to choose something that has little or no evidence (beyond anecdotal) of being effective for a certain presenting problem – regardless of how bias one might think the research is? Is it comfortability, agency philosophy, intuition, what you hope will work, what you have been told will work, faith, conformity, personal preference, authority, tradition, superstition, or something else and why?
“What standard would you want a physician to use if they were doing brain surgery on someone you loved – what the science has shown to work, or something with not as much demonstrated validity but the physician was more comfortable with?”
