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

Версія за 07:44, 26 лютого 2018

4, 2011 (pp. 533?63) c 2011 Milbank Memorial Fund. Published by Wiley Periodicals Inc.T. Greenhalgh, J. Russell, R.E. Ashcroft, and W. ParsonseHealth system is best conceptualized not as a blueprint and implementation plan to get a state-of-the-art technical program but as a series of overlapping, conflicting, and mutually misunderstood language games that combine to generate a scenario of ambiguity, paradox, incompleteness, and confusion. But going beyond technical "solutions" and engaging with these language games would clash together with the bounded rationality that policymakers usually employ to make their eHealth applications manageable. This could explain their restricted and contained response towards the nuanced messages of in-depth case study reports. Conclusion: The complexity of contemporary wellness care, combined together with the numerous stakeholders in massive technology initiatives, means that national eHealth applications require considerably far more thinking by means of than has occasionally occurred. We want fewer grand plans and much more Es incorporated commissioning overall health care and supporting and overseeing nearby general studying communities. The onus, for that reason, is on academics to develop approaches of drawing judiciously around the richness of case studies to inform and influence eHealth policy, which necessarily happens in a simplified selection atmosphere. Keywords: eHealth, policymaking, case study, ethnography, evaluation, Wittgenstein, sensemaking, studying neighborhood.eHealth Policy: The Canon of HistoryThose who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. --George Santayana (1863?952)National eHealth programs hardly ever unfold as predicted, especially when cautiously planned out in title= f1000research.9271.1 advance. Needless to say, that may be for the reason that they're complex and title= s12916-016-0650-2 unpredictable. But policymakers often persist in thinking that things will go superior subsequent time. Their hubris has reached a level that deserves to become researched in its personal ideal. To that end, this article argues that lessons are seldom learned from national eHealth programs since insufficient worth is placed on in-depth case research, and it tends to make this case on philosophical as an alternative to methodological grounds. We propose that national eHealth programs and, by extension, other complex technology projects with multiple stakeholders and interdependencies could usefully be reconceptualized as Wittgensteinian language games.Why National eHealth Applications Will need Dead PhilosophersThe United States' 2009 Health Facts Technologies for Economic and Clinical Overall health (HITECH) Act allocated as much as 27 billion for the adoption and "meaningful use" of electronic overall health records by physicians and hospitals in between 2011 and 2015 (Blumenthal and Tavenner 2010). Australia's federal spending budget for 2010/2011 incorporated A 466.7 million (US 473 million) for the design, developing, and title= JVI.00458-16 national rollout of a personally controlled electronic overall health 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).Generalization (as with experiments) nor theoretical generalization (as with multisite case comparisons or realist evaluations). However they do deliver the facility for heuristic generalization (i.e., to attain a clearer understanding of what is going on), thereby enabling additional productive debate about eHealth programs' complex, interdependent social practices. A national Address correspondence to: Trisha Greenhalgh, Yvonne Carter Constructing, 58 Turner Street, London E1 2AB (email: p.greenhalgh@qmul.ac.uk).The Milbank Quarterly, Vol. 89, No.