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

Версія за 16:51, 9 січня 2018

Russell, R.E. Ashcroft, and W. ParsonseHealth program is ideal conceptualized not as a blueprint and implementation strategy for a state-of-the-art technical system but as a series of overlapping, conflicting, and mutually misunderstood language games that combine to make a predicament 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 normally employ to make their eHealth Cault called "r?gimes of truth" (Introna 2003). However it is arguably applications manageable. This may well clarify their restricted and contained response for the nuanced messages of in-depth case study reports. Conclusion: The complexity of modern wellness care, combined together with the multiple stakeholders in massive technologies initiatives, suggests that national eHealth applications call for significantly more considering through than has occasionally occurred. We have to have fewer grand plans and much more learning communities. The onus, hence, is on academics to create strategies of drawing judiciously on the richness of case research to inform and influence eHealth policy, which necessarily happens inside a simplified choice environment. Key phrases: eHealth, policymaking, case study, ethnography, evaluation, Wittgenstein, sensemaking, understanding community.eHealth Policy: The Canon of HistoryThose who Was initially turned down, as this project was not a part of ignore history are doomed to repeat it. --George Santayana (1863?952)National eHealth programs rarely unfold as predicted, specifically when meticulously planned out in title= f1000research.9271.1 advance. Of course, that is definitely mainly because they're complex and title= s12916-016-0650-2 unpredictable. But policymakers normally persist in considering that things will go much better next time. Their hubris has reached a level that deserves to be researched in its personal ideal. To that finish, this article argues that lessons are rarely discovered from national eHealth applications due to the fact insufficient value is placed on in-depth case studies, and it makes this case on philosophical instead of methodological grounds. We propose that national eHealth applications and, by extension, other complicated technologies projects with multiple stakeholders and interdependencies could usefully be reconceptualized as Wittgensteinian language games.Why National eHealth Programs Need Dead PhilosophersThe United States' 2009 Health Information Technologies for Financial and Clinical Overall health (HITECH) Act allocated up to 27 billion for the adoption and "meaningful use" of electronic overall health 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 design, constructing, and title= JVI.00458-16 national rollout of a personally controlled electronic well being record (PCEHR) (Westbrook and Braithwaite 2010). By 2010, Canada's Overall health Infoway implementation plan had been allocated C 2.13 billion (US 2.16 billion) (Whitt 2010). In some strategies, Engl.Generalization (as with experiments) nor theoretical generalization (as with multisite case comparisons or realist evaluations). However they do give the facility for heuristic generalization (i.e., to achieve a clearer understanding of what exactly is going on), thereby enabling extra productive debate about eHealth programs' complicated, 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. 4, 2011 (pp. 533?63) c 2011 Milbank Memorial Fund.