Відмінності між версіями «Generalization (as with experiments) nor theoretical generalization (as with multisite case»

Версія за 08:25, 24 лютого 2018

Generalization (as with experiments) nor theoretical generalization (as with multisite case comparisons or realist evaluations). In some ways, Engl.Generalization (as with experiments) nor theoretical generalization (as with multisite case comparisons or realist evaluations). However they do provide the facility for heuristic generalization (i.e., to attain a clearer understanding of what exactly is going on), thereby enabling extra productive debate about eHealth programs' complex, interdependent social practices. A national Address correspondence to: Trisha Greenhalgh, Yvonne Carter Creating, 58 Turner Street, London E1 2AB (e mail: p.greenhalgh@qmul.ac.uk).The Milbank Quarterly, Vol. 89, No. four, 2011 (pp. 533?63) c 2011 Milbank Memorial Fund. Published by Wiley Periodicals Inc.T. Greenhalgh, J. Russell, R.E. Ashcroft, and W. ParsonseHealth program is finest conceptualized not as a blueprint and implementation plan for a state-of-the-art technical technique but as a series of overlapping, conflicting, and mutually misunderstood language games that combine to create a circumstance of ambiguity, paradox, incompleteness, and confusion. But going beyond technical "solutions" and engaging with these language games would clash using the bounded rationality that policymakers generally employ to make their eHealth applications manageable. This may well clarify their limited and contained response for the nuanced messages of in-depth case study reports. Conclusion: The complexity of contemporary overall health care, combined using the multiple stakeholders in large technology initiatives, signifies that national eHealth applications need considerably much more pondering by means of than has occasionally occurred. We require fewer grand plans and much more studying communities. The onus, consequently, is on academics to develop methods of drawing judiciously around the richness of case studies to inform and influence eHealth policy, which necessarily occurs in a simplified decision atmosphere. Search phrases: eHealth, policymaking, case study, ethnography, evaluation, Wittgenstein, sensemaking, mastering community.eHealth Policy: The Canon of HistoryThose who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. --George Santayana (1863?952)National eHealth applications hardly ever unfold as predicted, in particular when carefully planned out in title= f1000research.9271.1 advance. Of course, that may be since they may be complicated and title= s12916-016-0650-2 unpredictable. But policymakers frequently persist in pondering that points will go far better subsequent time. Their hubris has reached a level that deserves to become researched in its own correct. To that finish, this article argues that lessons are seldom discovered from national eHealth programs simply because insufficient worth is placed on in-depth case studies, and it makes this case on philosophical rather than methodological grounds. We propose that national eHealth applications and, by extension, other complicated technology projects with various stakeholders and interdependencies could usefully be reconceptualized as Wittgensteinian language games.Why National eHealth Programs Have to have Dead PhilosophersThe United States' 2009 Well being Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Well being (HITECH) Act allocated up to 27 billion for the adoption and "meaningful use" of electronic well being records by physicians and hospitals amongst 2011 and 2015 (Blumenthal and Tavenner 2010). Australia's federal price range for 2010/2011 included A 466.7 million (US 473 million) for the style, developing, and title= JVI.00458-16 national rollout of a personally controlled electronic wellness record (PCEHR) (Westbrook and Braithwaite 2010). By 2010, Canada's Health Infoway implementation system had been allocated C 2.13 billion (US two.16 billion) (Whitt 2010).