The Lancet Series on the digital determinants of health: (What only three papers?)

Published: October 4, 2026

Executive summary

Digital technologies have become embedded within the systems and environments that shape health and wellbeing. They influence how people access information, communicate, learn, work, access health care, participate in society, and make decisions about their lives. Understanding and governing these determinants has therefore become a critical public health priority. This three-paper Series proposes a new approach for conceptualising and responding to the digital determinants of health, and sets a bold agenda for future research, practice, and governance.

https://www.thelancet.com/series-do/digital-determinants-of-health

My source: 'Unnecessary Services in Clinical Medicine & Public Health' group. 

Whether it is a journal, a clinic, community disciplinary team, a government committee, or an APPG - all-party parliamentary group, a university course (outside 'general studies') ... we are dealing with knowledge silos. Even more so, in the case of a journal series, special issue, or most conferences. 

There is always a case for expertise, in-depth perspectives and evidence-based understanding. Finding cures for cancer, diseases, the future of AI as relates to humanity's continuity are prime examples. When we speak of integrated care, if that care begins with education and self-care, then we need to consider all the determinants. Not only that, we need to conduct this investigative task concurrently with all the literacies. Otherwise, theory, practice, management, policy and ongoing research may struggle to cohere. Integration is essential, to facilitate sustainability, measurement and subsequent reporting. Hodges' model can assist.

Sometimes it can take an old model ...

 

'Sometimes it can take an old model, 
to build a new one, 
that makes the existing model obsolete.'

To borrow from Buckminster Fuller.                         

 
Resurgence & Ecologist, Sept/Oct 2020, Issue 322, p.33.

Call for Papers: Bioethics and Philosophical Health - JECP

Submission Deadline: Thursday, 31 December 2026

Contemporary bioethics has developed sophisticated tools for ethical decision-making. Yet it often operates within assumptions that reduce life to physiological viability. Ethical questions are frequently treated as matters of procedure and consent. Meanwhile, patients and clinicians face questions that exceed these frameworks. What makes a life worth living? How does illness disrupt or reveal meaning? What forms of care support not just survival but existential coherence? These questions call for a deeper engagement between bioethics and the philosophy of existence.

Despite growing interest in person-centred care, conceptual tools for clinical evaluation remain limited. Frameworks for assessing philosophical sense-making and existential orientation are underdeveloped. The Philosophical Health perspective addresses this gap by going beyond physical and psychological health. It asks how we cultivate meaningful lives through bodily experience, self-understanding, relational belonging, engagement with possibility, purposeful action, and philosophical reflection. The concept draws on the ancient tradition of bios philosophikos. It proposes that healthcare should attend not only to pathology but to the philosophical dimensions of human existence.

This special issue creates space for exploring how philosophical health can deepen bioethical inquiry as an embodied ethics of the good life. It challenges reductive assumptions and fosters practices that support purpose and meaning in lives, even when disrupted by health challenges. We welcome transdisciplinary contributions from philosophers, bioethicists, clinicians, medical humanists, and social scientists. Topics include how philosophical frameworks enrich clinical practice, how healthcare shapes existential experience, how the 4E cognitive approach may inform bioethical theory, and how dialogical methodologies can be integrated into institutional contexts. The issue aims to rediscover bioethics as a genuinely philosophical and existential enterprise, that is as bios ethikos.

Topics of interest for this call for papers include but are not restricted to:

• Philosophical frameworks for enriching or transforming bioethical practice and clinical evaluation;
• Philosophical dimensions of clinical encounters: embodiment, selfhood, temporality, and meaning-making;
• Critiques of the reduction of ethical deliberation to procedure, regulation, or risk management;
• How healthcare practices shape or constrain the philosophical dimensions of human existence;
• The 4E cognitive approach (embodied, extended, enactive, embedded) applied to bioethical theory and practice;
• Integration of philosophical inquiry and dialogical methods into clinical or institutional contexts;
• Empirical and conceptual engagement with the Philosophical Health methodology, including SMILE_PH;
• Cross-cultural and planetary perspectives on philosophical health and the good life;
• Methodological innovations in clinical philosophy, philosophical counselling, and reflective practice.

More details here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/page/journal/13652753/call-for-papers/si-2026-000772

_______

Dr Luis de Miranda

Associate Professor (Docent) in Bioethics, Uppsala University

Marie Skłodowska-Curie Fellow, Turku Institute for Advanced Studies
Associated Researcher, Centre for Research Ethics and Bioethics,

Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University

https://www.luisdemiranda.com/

My source: Philos-L "The Liverpool List" is run by the Department of Philosophy, University of Liverpool https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/philosophy/philos-l/ Messages to the list are archived at http://listserv.liv.ac.uk/archives/philos-l.html. Follow the list on Twitter @PhilosL. Follow the Department of Philosophy @LiverpoolPhilos

Leapspace iii - References ii

Regards the two other references listed by Leapspace in the previous post:

Jones, P. (2009) Socio-technical structures, 4Ps and hodges' model. Nursing and Clinical Informatics: Socio-Technical Approaches. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60566-234-3.ch011 

Jones, P. (2011) Socio-technical structures, 4Ps and hodges' model. Clinical Technologies: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools and Applications. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60960-561-2.ch215 

The doi links above lead to a page where to read the 'View Full Text HTML', or 'PDF' you need a login. This suggests a paywall(?), but the paper can be found here:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1842543&rec=1&srcabs=886584&alg=7&pos=3

These are not the original reference or title:

Jones, P. (2009) Socio-Technical Structures, the Scope of Informatics and Hodges’ model, IN, Staudinger, R., Ostermann, H., Bettina Staudinger, B. (Eds.), Handbook of Research in Nursing Informatics and Socio-Technical Structures, Idea Group Publishing, Inc. Chap. 11, pp. 160-174.

I am unable to check fully, but it appears in 2011, the paper was republished in another collection. It is nice to have a 'bovine' experience, with a lesson about copyright, open access, and predatory publishing. Alteration of titles is bound to result in repetition, confounding the accuracy of publication metrics and indices?

I am not going to add the second reference to the blog's bibliography.

Where is the Centeredness of Care?

In trying to see Hodges' model anew, which is quite a challenge after four decades; what of the model's structure?

It is easy to get carried away with mathematical terminology:

One line, add another, and they intersect, at a 90 degree right angle. So is centeredness to be found at the intersection point? 

If I'm tying myself up in knots well there's another possibility! 😉 

As a whole it appears the axes of the model are a manifold and not - in the center?

What do you think?

See also: 'What Is a Manifold?'

https://www.quantamagazine.org/what-is-a-manifold-20251103/

Call for Abstracts: Land Use for Net Zero Hub Early Career Conference

Dear colleagues,

 

We are pleased to open the call for abstracts for the Land Use for Net Zero Hub Early Career Conference, which will be held on 7 September (1:00–6:00 pm) at the James Hutton Institute in Aberdeen, ahead of the LUNZ consortium meeting (8–10 September). The call for abstracts will close on 12 June 2026.

 

The conference theme is: “Future Careers at the Science–Policy Interface: Exploring Opportunities and Challenges in LUNZ.”

 

We aim to bring together early career researchers and practitioners from LUNZ Hub and LUNZ Research, as well as other early career groups interested in the conference themes, to network, share work, and discuss careers at the science–policy interface.

 

We welcome abstracts for poster and oral presentations within the following themes. Submissions can include works in progress and unpublished research, as we aim to stimulate open dialogue, feedback, and learning. We also encourage contributions from partners beyond academia. The format of the day will be shaped by the level of interest across these topics:

 

• Transdisciplinary collaboration across sectors and knowledge systems
• Science communication and knowledge impact
• Modelling and evidence for land use change
• Integrating people, place, and nature in Net Zero transitions
• Just transitions and community resilience
• Community-based research in academia and policy

 

Please complete the following form to submit your abstract: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeOzhkowu0NdM3YlQz-XEIovSB3805zX5LTT4Fm7FzBPq3f7Q/viewform?usp=header

 

Once we have received and reviewed abstracts, we will open up registration to presenters and the wider community.

 

If you are interested in helping with the organisation of the conference at an early stage, we would be very happy to hear from you—please get in touch.

 

We look forward to your participation.

 

Best regards,

LUNZ Early Career Board

https://lunzhub.com/get-involved/early-careers-board/

 

Anita Lazurko (she/her)

Senior Transdisciplinary Scientist

Biodiversity and Land Use

--------------------------------

My source: At 'Ecologies of Care':

Henrike (Kika) Neuhaus

Pronouns: she/her, they/them

Post-doctoral Research Fellow in Anthropology and Art

Livelihoods and Institutions Department

Natural Resources Institute

University of Greenwich 

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0002-1245-5881

Tanzania Health Summit (THS)

Hello Peter Jones,

Warm greetings from the Tanzania Health Summit (THS).

As we prepare for the 13th Tanzania Health Summit, scheduled for 5th–7th October 2026 at Mlimani City Conference Center, Dar es Salaam, we are excited to share key opportunities and updates for your participation.

Abstracts Submission is underway, submit before 1st June.

We invite researchers, innovators, and professionals to submit abstracts aligned with this year’s theme:

“Building Health Sovereignty and Strengthening
Health Systems in a Changing Global Order.”

This is your opportunity to showcase impactful work and contribute to national and global health conversations.

Elizabeth & her Colleagues story about their wish to present at THS: 

SUBMIT YOUR ABSTRACT NOW!!!

Early Bird Registration is Still Open

Secure your spot at a discounted rate by registering early. Take advantage of this limited-time offer and be part of Tanzania’s largest healthcare gathering.

My source: Email - THS

Invite to an In-person Interactive Workshop to Advance Action on SDoH [Geneva]

Advancing the Social Determinants of Health during the World Health Assembly

Dear Colleague

Is it possible to share in HIFA Network the following announcement?

Thanks a lot for your precious help

Dr Eric Comte Director of the Geneva Health Forum https://genevahealthforum.com

HIFA profile: Eric Comte is Executive Director, Geneva Health Forum, External Affairs Directorate, Geneva University Hospitals. eric.comte AT unige.ch

Bonjour,

We are pleased to invite you to take part in an interactive workshop dedicated to advancing action on the social determinants of health.

Forty years after the Ottawa Charter, there is broad consensus on the importance of health promotion and the determinants of health. Yet, translating this knowledge into effective policies and concrete action remains a major challenge. In a context marked by climate change, growing inequalities, rapid urbanisation and geopolitical instability, the need for more integrated, preventive and equity-oriented approaches has never been greater.

Building on this observation, this session will bring together, NGO, practitioners, policymakers and experts to move beyond general principles and focus on what really enables implementation in practice. Through the exchange of real-world experiences and case studies, participants will collectively identify actionable lessons, key barriers, and practical ways forward.

The expected outcome is a set of clear, operational messages to strengthen collaboration across sectors and support the implementation of strategies addressing the social determinants of health in diverse contexts. The session will also provide an opportunity to identify concrete avenues for further work, including potential projects that the Geneva Health Forum could support.

The workshop will take place on Tuesday 19 May from 9.00 to 12.30 at Campus Biotech in Geneva.

We would be delighted to count on your participation and active contribution to this important discussion.

👉 More information and registration on the link : https://worldhealthassembly2026.genevahealthforum.com/rethinking-determinants-of-health-in-todays-global-context-from-knowledge-to-action/

Space is limited, so only register if you really want to attend.

Registration is free but required so we can print badges and organize the workshop.

Link with the World Health Assembly discussions

This workshop is directly aligned with the strategic discussions taking place at the World Health Assembly, particularly in relation to document EB158/27 on well-being and health promotion. This report highlights the growing recognition of health promotion and the social determinants of health as essential pillars of public health, while also emphasizing the persistent gaps in implementation and the need to strengthen multisectoral action, governance, and measurable impact.

In particular, it calls for better integration of health promotion across the full continuum of policies and systems, stronger cross-sector collaboration, and a renewed focus on addressing structural determinants of health, including through more effective implementation mechanisms and improved coordination across actors.

Our session contributes to this agenda by focusing on practical experiences and implementation challenges, with the aim of identifying concrete, actionable lessons that can help accelerate the translation of global commitments into real-world action. In doing so, it also seeks to feed into ongoing reflections at the global level and to support more effective implementation of the priorities discussed at the World Health Assembly.

You are receiving this message because you are a member of the community HIFA - Healthcare Information For All.

View this contribution on the web site

Jürgen Habermas RIP: 'Synthetic abilities - Synthetic thinking'

'Jürgen Habermas is recognized for his immense

synthetic ability, integrating diverse cognitive domains—philosophy, sociology, linguistics, and psychology—to develop a cohesive theory of communicative action and social critique. His synthetic thinking aims to bridge modern rationalism with normative concerns, creating an interdisciplinary framework that addresses the complexities of modern society.'

Google AI Overview: https://share.google/aimode/Tev1Ip96TMCMcEgdF 

'It is true that the sciences are increasingly interconnected with the development of productivity by way of technical progress; however, technical progress is not the only branch of science in the line of instrumental rationality defenders from Descartes and Bacon's scientific method. This is what distinguishes the Newtonian science from the second group of considerations: Darwinian science and contemporary systems theory (as Habermas, 1984 puts it). The latter do invite us to see the science as “an organism, population, or system [that] maintains itself through demarcation from and adaptation to a changeable, hypercomplex environment” (Habermas, 1984, p. 388). Also, the classical philosophical tradition, insofar that it suggests the possibility of a worldview, has become questionable:

Philosophy can no longer refer to the whole of the world, of nature, of history, of society, in the sense of a totalizing knowledge. Theoretical surrogates for worldviews have been devalued, not only by the factual advance of empirical science but even more by the reflective consciousness accompanying it. (Habermas, 1984, p. 1)'

Mejía Fernández, R. & Romero, J. (2022) Social Evolution in Jürgen Habermas: Towards a Weak Anthropological Naturalism between Kant and Darwin. Theoria, 88(3), 607–628. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/theo.12383

'According to Habermas, the self of the ethical life stage embodies a basis for a postmetaphysical grounding of the good life:

'Rather, all his attention is on the structure of the ability to be oneself, that is, on the form of an ethical self-reflection and self-choice that is determined by the infinite interest in the success of one’s own life-project. With a view toward future possibilities of action, the individual self-critically appropriates the past of her factually given, concretely re-presented life history. Only then does she make herself into a person who speaks for herself, an irreplaceable individual.'30 

Viertbauer, Jürgen HKlaus (2019) Habermas on the Way to a Postmetaphysical Reading of Kierkegaard.
European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 11 (4): 137-162. (p.145).

My source: Nick Pearce, Philosopher who fought the slide towards illiberalism, Jürgen Habermas Obituary. FTWeekend, 21-22 March 2026. p.9.

Cooperative Design Visualization and Engineering - CDVE2026 Call for Papers

The 23rd International conference on Cooperative Design Visualization and Engineering (CDVE2026) will be held at the Leuphana University, Lunenburg, Germany on September 21-23, 2026 in their amazing architecture landmark main building. Please check the Youtube video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YrWvqdu6_E.

Important dates:

Long paper (10 pages): April 10, 2026
Short papers (6 pages): April 20, 2026

Topics: The conference focus is "cooperative". Papers about cooperative design, cooperative visualization, cooperative engineering and all other cooperative applications are welcome. Papers about multiple users, locations, sensors, multimodal applications and integration are all within our focus. Topics also cover social networks, IoT, sensor networks, e-health care, e-education etc. Check our web page

www.cdve.org for more information.

Proceedings publication: by Springer Nature in their LNCS - Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

All accepted papers will be indexed individually by Conference Proceedings Citation Index (CPCI), part of Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science, EI Engineering Index (Compendex and Inspec databases), ACM, Digital Library, DBLP, Google Scholar, IO-Port, MathSciNet, Scopus, Zentralblatt MATH etc. 

Selected papers will be considered in a couple SCI journal special issues.

In addition, according to the publisher, the CDVE conference proceedings books have very high number of access among the LNCS proceedings books which can definitely raise the impact of your paper.

The submission page: https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=cdve2026

Contact of the conference: cdve2026 AT easychair.org

You are welcome to forward this call.
---------------------------------------------

The 23rd International Conference on Cooperative Design, Visualization and Engineering
Sept. 21-23, 2026, Lüneburg, Germany
www.cdve.org

iv Book: Bill Ross - 'Order and the Virtual'

'The Philosophy and Science of Deleuzian Cosmology'

Systemists will find much here: 'principle of least action', 'principle of least resistance', equilibrium, open / closed systems, and entropy. A useful question is posed: 'Is complexity increasing? Is that average complexity across the universe; or the complexity of the most complex object? Deleuzes's Difference and Repetition is quoted:

'The values of implication are centres of envelopment. These centres  are not the intensive individuating factors themselves, but they are their representatives within a complex whole in the process of explication. ...' (p.255-6)'

Reading this I immediately thought of Bohm, who followed shortly after (still in Chapter 1!). In chapter 1, 'Chaos' could be read as Cosmos, hence the term rolling them together - chaosmos. This is the tract from which existence and becoming arise (re-reading). Deleuze's awareness of physics and quantum theory and its influence on his work is discussed, with chapter 2 providing continuity reaching to Leibniz (and 'The Calculating God'), also contributing is 'the complete concept', 'principle of sufficient reason', 'intensive individuating factors' and 'principle of identity of indiscernibles', for example. Even while the context is metaphysics (and it is not!), (for me) this seemingly presages a comprehensive health assessment:

'The necessity in question is the necessary inclusion of all predicates pertaining to an individual in the complete concept of that individual.' p.24.

There are several 'completes' to be unwound, and so better understood. Ross provides a key. This isn't a book to read and pass-on to a student, second-hand bookshop. It really deserves re-reading, mandatory here - to get hold of the ideas and interplay of Deleuze, Ross's understanding and it must be said interpretation, that also calls upon Dan Smith's Essays on Deleuze, (EUP) and directly Leibniz's work. 

'The complete concept idea of predication is furnished to map faithfully onto these principles concerning the nature of things.' p.26.

The expanse of thought and literature from across the channel, 'French Theory' has long tempted, teased and taunted (not-quite as severely as mathematics!). At least here you can get a sense of the traffic in thought and ideas. Deleuze is difficult (in-/compossibilities, kuklos exothen ...), until you relate: becoming over being, difference over identity, and creation over representation. Order and the Virtual helps in this task. Delueze is 'embedded' in the mechanics of complexity, and mathematics, but Deleuze and Ross can see - across - to the humanities (virtual and actual). 

'Lastly, while mathematical concepts are frequently adopted to illuminate Deleuze's argument, they should not be taken as metaphorically representative of processes in the world; this would be to ignore the broadside and extended attack on representation as a mode of thinking as such which occupies so much of Difference and Repetition. Rather, they serve as a particularly direct example of the differential processes to which all phenomena - natural, social, psychological are subject. In an unambiguous sense, it is eminently possible for problems prompting a mathematical response to express themselves in altogether different domains - natural, social, etc. The problem is, so to speak, a common root of all domains.' p.39.

Still grappling, I noted integration, actualization, parity of esteem, maths - the linear and non-linear. It seems Deleuze was challenged by the question of integration. Leibniz's contribution of the calculus is acknowledged. History and even the present remain preoccupied with finding boxes. Ross explains how for Deleuze, we should not discount turbulent phenomena that cannot be simply integrated, written off as random disorder.

If we associate complication, with implication and explication, do we invite two-fold (as a minimal - keyhole) 'surgery': (re-)constructive and destructive? Thank you Mr Ross. I see now, how the (infinity →) continuum will not be exhausted. Exploring axioms for Hodges' model, and what is axiomatic, I must check Albert Lautman's model of dynamic structuration, especially when set (against / with?) the problematic mode:

'The two modes relate to each other dialectically - a period of exploration followed by the resulting period of axiomatisation. Deleuze recognises both modes and their respective utility, but for his philosophy the problematic mode is by far the more important.' p.41.

Do our boxes still have a purpose? To tame the situation - at hand/mind/virtual?

More to follow here ...

Bill Ross (2024) Order and the Virtual: The Philosophy and Science of Deleuzian Cosmology. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. 
https://edinburghuniversitypress.com/book-order-and-the-virtual.html

If "mechanism-based approach to theorizing offers an encompassing way ...

... to think about social and ecological phenomena":

What if there was a model that could encompass 
mechanism-based and humanistic-based theorising?

'A core challenge of studying ecosystems and societies as one system is integrating social and ecological theorizing. Although the social and the ecological intertwine in multiple ways, much traditional theory focuses on one or the other (Schlüter et al. 2022). Despite good intentions, attempts for integration are often only partially successful. One reason for this is the apparent incommensurability of methodological and theoretical approaches. However, the mechanism-based approach to theorizing offers an encompassing way to think about social and ecological phenomena by framing them in terms of entities and their interactions. Mechanism-based theorizing has been gaining popularity in science philosophy (Machamer et al. 2000, Craver 2007, Glennan and Illari 2017), including social sciences philosophy (Elster 1989, Hedström and Swedberg 1998, Hedström and Ylikoski 2010) and philosophy of ecology (Pâslaru 2017, González del Solar et al. 2019). It has helped to resolve many traditional problems related to scientific explanation and it is consistent with the way in which social and natural scientists talk about theorizing, causation, and explanation.'

 

Fig. 1. The social-ecological expansion of Coleman’s diagram.

Martínez-Peña, R., & Ylikoski, P. (2024). Coupling social and ecological mechanisms with the Coleman boat. Ecology and Society, 29(4). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-15209-290406

See also: 'micro' : 'macro' : 'Bunge'

Health Policy Watch: WHO’s Big Push to Integrate Traditional Medicine into Global Healthcare Framework

This is quite a development for the lived experience of all individuals, global health and for Hodges' model. Not only for Hodges' model as a universal framework (template) and model for / of care, but the capacity of Hodges' model to conceptually and culturally encompass all data, information, knowledge and wisdom.

c/o HIFA list:

Full text: https://healthpolicy-watch.news/whos-big-push-to-integrate-traditional-medicine-into-global-healthcare-framework/

'The World Health Assembly delivered a landmark victory for traditional medicine and indigenous cultures Monday evening, approving a strategy that calls for increased investment in research and integrating ancient healing practices into modern healthcare systems worldwide.

'The approval marks a breakthrough moment for advocates of traditional medicine, with nations across Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Latin America celebrating the decision. Iran called it “a visionary yet realistic roadmap” to integrate thousands of years of medical like its own.

'But the strategy text shows WHO walking a careful tightrope, embracing practices that represent “accumulated wisdom and healing practices passed down through generations” while demanding they meet modern scientific evidence standards that could take decades to satisfy...'

Best wishes, Neil

HIFA profile: Neil Pakenham-Walsh is coordinator of HIFA (Healthcare Information For All), a global health community that brings all stakeholders together around the shared goal of universal access to reliable healthcare information.

See also: 'Oceania' : 'indigenous' : 'ancient' : 'map' : 'nature'

Vectors of the Biopolitical - (Chap. 2) c/o Bull

The Concept of the Social

'From one sentence in Aristotle derive two arresting theoret- ical discourses of the twenty-first century: Michel Foucault's biopolitics, provocatively reformulated by Giorgio Agamben in terms of the relationship between sovereignty and the body, and the capabilities approach developed by Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum as a means of evaluating and promoting development, justice and freedom. Both are characterized by deep reflection on the sources of Western political thought, and by urgent engagement with contemporary social and legal problems. Both are in some sense biopolitical in that they are shaped by the interplay of the same Aristotelian categories the human and the animal, politics and nature. But they are on opposite sides of the divide that has opened up in the human sciences since the 1960s, and there currently seems no optic through which they might simultaneously be viewed, no way of integrating or comparing their insights.

 

In part, this reflects a situation in which political debate appears to have fragmented into a multiplicity of single issues. The ancient 'Who will rule?' and the modern 'Who shall have what?' have been supplemented by an array of questions that deal with matters once exclusively cultural, personal or natural. For previous eras, the relative integrity and unmalleability of cultures, bodies and environments rendered such questions redundant. Now they frequently appear unanswerable from within established political traditions, and incommensurable in relation to each other. Within this expanded field, biopolitics and the capabilities approach have unusual salience and potential, for both bundle together issues otherwise assumed to be distinct. If they, in turn, could be coordinated, perhaps we could begin to map the new territory.' p.68.

individual

|

INTERPERSONAL : SCIENCES

humanistic ------------------------------- mechanistic

SOCIOLOGY : POLITICAL

|

group

'Who shall have what?'	nature human - animal bio-
culture	political 'Who will rule?'

Bull, M. (2021) The Concept of the Social, London: Verso.

New citations - Practice Without Theory: A Philosophical Inquiry into Contemporary Nursing in South Asia

It is always welcome news when I learn of a paper (Asmat, 2024) recognising and citing Hodges' model from the nursing and wider literature. In this case an educational journal, focussed upon health and social care:

Kainat Asmat (2024). Practice Without Theory: A Philosophical Inquiry into Contemporary Nursing in South Asia: Nursing Practice without Theory. International Journal of Practice-based Learning in Health and Social Care. 12. 125-131. 10.18552/ijpblhsc.v12i2.1068. 

I have quoted at length, but it is good to have a different 'excuse' (not just extending the tail of a relevant book, or paper). ... 

'Similarly, Hodges' Health Career Model exemplifies its use as a tool for reflection during clinical assessments, care planning, and decision-making processes (Doyle & Jones, 2013). The model encourages nurses to reflect on their practice through multiple lenses, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of patient needs and care strategies. The Interpersonal domain emphasizes the relational aspects of nursing, including communication and empathy. The Sociological domain highlights the impact of societal factors and social determinants on health. The Scientific domain focuses on evidence-based practice and the integration of scientific knowledge into care. Finally, the Political domain addresses the influence of healthcare policies and organizational structures on contemporary nursing practice. In contemporary nursing practice, a nurse might use Hodges’ model to provide holistic and personalized care by considering the patient's social background, the scientific basis of their care, interpersonal dynamics, and relevant political or policy-related factors. According to Jones (2017), using conceptual models like Hodges' can greatly enhance nurses' critical thinking, fostering a reflective and engaged nursing workforce.' p.126.

'Collectively, nursing theory remains a cornerstone of contemporary nursing practice, providing an essential framework that guides clinical decision-making, promotes critical thinking, and supports reflective practice. Peter Jones, in his seminal works, underscores the critical role of theoretical models in enhancing nursing practice. His insights provide compelling evidence for the continued relevance of theory in contemporary practice. In "Humans, Information, and Science", Jones (1996a), articulates the interrelationship between human factors, informational processes, and scientific principles in healthcare. He argues that nursing, as a discipline, uniquely integrates these elements to form a comprehensive approach to patient care. This integration is fundamental in moving beyond task-oriented care towards a practice that is reflective and evidence-based. Jones emphasizes that without a theoretical foundation, contemporary nursing practice risks becoming fragmented and superficial, lacking the depth required for truly effective patient care. Similarly, in "An Overarching Theory of Health Communication",  Jones (1996b) explores the necessity of robust communication theories in healthcare. He posits that effective communication is not merely a skill but a complex process grounded in theoretical understanding. This perspective is particularly relevant to nursing, where communication is pivotal in patient interactions, interdisciplinary collaboration, and health education. Jones’ work illustrates that theoretical frameworks in communication enhance nurses' ability to engage with patients and colleagues thoughtfully and effectively, fostering better health outcomes and professional practice. Jones’ analyses reinforce the argument that nursing theory is indispensable in contemporary practice. Likewise, McEwen and Wills (2021) also highlight that nursing theory is integral to the development of nursing as a discipline. They assert that without the theoretical underpinnings, nursing risks regressing to a technical occupation devoid of critical thinking and judgment that characterize nursing professional practice. Thus, the survival and progression of nursing as a distinct profession depend on the continued integration and application of theory in contemporary nursing practice.' p.127.

In addition, the short conclusion is supportive and encouraging for ongoing efforts. As with all discovered citations thus far, I'm not sure of how Kainat Asmat located the publications on Hodges' model? A literature search - no doubt, or perhaps the blog's sidebar listing? The selection made, fits the author's purpose. 

Over the years, I've tried to indicate the scope and scale that Hodges' model can 'reach'. Especially in self-care, family, local, global and planetary health. Now, c/o Asmat (2024), Hodges' model has a much valued connection with South Asia. The required scope of Hodges' model (its inter- and transdisciplinary potential^) is also conceptual, referred to previously as holistic bandwidth. Hence the model's relevance and potential in theory and practice.

Many thanks to Kainat Asmat and the journal's editorial team.*

I will read again and return to the paper in our New Year.

Listed in the bibliography:

Doyle, M., Jones, P. (2013). Hodges’ Health Career Model and its role and potential application in forensic mental health nursing. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing. 20, 7, 631-640.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2850.2012.01961.x/abstract

Jones, P. (1996a) Humans, Information, and Science, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 24(3),591-598. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1996.23321.x

Jones, P. (1996b) An overarching theory of health communication? Health Informatics Journal,2,1,28-34.

Where I have now added this paper.

^Still on the agenda as a paper; as with 'revisiting' 1996a. Happy to support others in referencing, or writing more specifically about Hodges' model (a case study, mapping exercise?); especially student nurses, carers and personnel in social care and early career researchers. To which, I'd better add later career nurses, allied disciplines, nurses returning to practice (surely a UK and global policy focus?) and proof of reading (your choice of course on the paper, chapter, book...); and reflection for continuing professional development (CPD). If you're still unsure, it was a relief to put the 'pen' down, well writing is still a major challenge (and pain) here. 

*And, of course - Brian E. Hodges RIP - too.
https://hodges-model.blogspot.com/2023/08/brian-e-hodges-r-i-p.html

The Science of Conceptual Systems - and Hodges' model

Wallis, S.E. The Science of Conceptual Systems: A Progress Report. Found Sci 21, 579–602 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-015-9425-z

From the conclusion:

'The approaches presented here do not provide a ‘‘map’’ for advancing the sciences. Indeed, none is available because we are advancing across that new terrain. What it does provide is a compass suggesting a new and potentially exciting direction to travel. Historically/traditionally, scholars have travelled about the countryside of the social/behavioral land making useful observations and gathering interesting data. They have often staked claims regarding the importance of their terrain. They could not advance more purposefully because they were guided only by intuition. So, they did not know what direction was ‘‘forward’’ although it seemed to have something to do with empirical analysis. Today, with the creation of a new science, we have a new direction.

When we do have a choice between theoretical maps, generally, and metaphorically, this paper suggests that we should choose to create and use roadmaps with many dots connected by many lines; not maps with few disconnected dots.' p.594.

There is also a glossary [pp.594-599] that includes:

'Integral thinking

Understanding (or attempting to understand) the world from a transdisciplinary perspective where those many perspectives are interrelated'

'Integrative propositional analysis (IPA)

Combined processes of qualitative and quantitative analysis involving rigorous hermeneutic deconstruction of propositions found in formal texts including the rigorous reintegration of propositions from those texts following a structured methodology. Also a process of meta-analysis for investigating conceptual systems to determine the Complexity of conceptual systems (diversity of concepts) and the Systemicity of the conceptual system (connectedness between concepts)'

'Mental model 

A representation within one’s mind about how the world works. Useful for understanding and engaging the world and for making predictions'

'Parsimony 

Generally, the understanding that a theory is better when it is smaller. Or, as small as possible while including ideas that are necessary or useful. Ockham’s Razor is a common example'

INDIVIDUAL

|

INTERPERSONAL : SCIENCES              

humanistic ---------------------------- mechanistic

SOCIOLOGY : POLITICAL   

|

GROUP

more SUBJECTIVE	more OBJECTIVE
QUALITY	QUANTITY

'Reflexive dimensional analysis (RDA) 

A process for creating a unified conceptual system from multiple conceptual systems through a process of categorization, abstraction, dimensionalization, and the identification of causal connections'

'Theory 

An ordered set of assertions. Weick (1989, p. 517. Drawing on Southerland)'

Cited above: 

Weick, K. E. (1989). Theory construction as disciplined imagination. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 516–531.

Previously:

terrain : landscape : line-of-sight (with overlap; of interest in itself)

"Integrated - care": What's in a word, or two?

This blog post was sat in 'drafts' since 28/01/2007 (yes, I know what that suggests). It concerns an issue, or more properly a theoretical and experiential aspiration in health AND social care that should in truth have provoked many papers for Hodges' model by now.

In the almost 18 years since, I wonder about the total number of papers devoted to this subject, the service's delivery, policy, outcomes, reviews and reports on integrated care? In nursing theory, philosophy and the start of many 'learned papers', it is customary to begin with a definition of terms. What happens when we divide 'integrated care' and first treat integrated and care separately? Does this aid our understanding? Do we divide and conquer? Is there a difference in results? Conceptual analysis would see us do both, and conduct a literature search.

In practice, (and clinical - especially) we often use words in rather lackadaisical way. Not surprising really, after all we've got a job to do! When pronouncements are made regards health and social policy I hear it as good intentions. I also reach for my soap box. It is often hyperbole, rhetoric. The same applies to the related idea and ideal(?) of holistic care, and person-centredness. I'm biased, of course, but I believe that Hodges' model can help to scope, and define these idealised features of health and social care (and education). As noted, people don't have the luxury of time to stop and deliberate on the precise meaning of the language they routinely use. As noted, at the end of the day - if it gets the job done then that's sound.

In a poll of words that are both much used and the meaning taken for granted integrated must be near the top for several reasons:

• its seniority: it has been around for decades.
• its scope across sectors and day-to-day life.
• our dependence on its fulfillment.

N-Gram suggests some possible insights into integrated and related forms of care:

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=integrated+care,holistic+care,person-centered+care&year_start=1800&year_end=2022&corpus=en&smoothing=3 

[Trying to embed, results in 1/3 white space at the bottom?]

It seems that integrated care [IC] has been a standing agenda item in health and social care media, education, the workforce, conference, exhibition and policy for several decades. Perhaps, things have calmed somewhat? So either IC is either very important, complex, a hard thing in practice or maybe it's all of these and more besides? IC is a undeniably a compound concept. Is this a cop-out though? You declare something 'compound' then sit back - job-done? I've suggested the same of threshold concepts in health (and probably other contexts?). Time will tell. In the meantime I have reflected on 'integrated care' across the domains of Hodges' model:

self

|

INTERPERSONAL : SCIENCES              

humanistic ------------------------------- mechanistic

SOCIOLOGY : POLITICAL   

|

other

INTEGRATION OF: PRACTITIONER; Team; service; org... Philosophy* assessments threshold for acceptance into service (referral criteria) patient experience & engagement health education / literacies programmes spiritual research involvement	INTEGRATION OF: health record (e- or paper) location - team base care disciplines geographical area referral sources assessments - tools/scales data and statistics research involvement
INTEGRATION OF: HEALTH & SOCIAL CARE public engagement hospital  carer (parent/guardian) experience community services social care - NHS family experience public engagement in research Patient / Public Community Advocacy Treat demand :: Support prevention	INTEGRATION OF: funding leadership / management accountability - complaints (not the same thing!) outcome measures ILLNESS - PREVENTION / education self-care <> planetary care -  Sustainability assisted dying! palliative care! Public - Private - Voluntary Sectors Provider :: Purchaser [Systems] All-Party Parliamentary Groups^

*ethics, values.

^One aspect of so-called 'joined-up government'.

Call - Special issue: Learning from Multiple Data Sources for Decision Making in Health Care

The increasing availability of digital data, along with recent developments in Artificial Intelligence, especially in the Machine Learning and Deep Learning fields, led the scientific community to debate whether data alone is sufficient for decision making and scientific exploration. We focus the attention on the healthcare domain, where peculiar issues affect data: indeed, data are usually collected under heterogeneous conditions (i.e., different populations, regimes, and sampling methods), suffer missingness – very often not at random – and their use is strongly constrained by privacy issues. In such a complex setting, this special issue challenges computer scientists to contribute to the above debate by designing and developing innovative methodological approaches, for solving complex decision-making problems in health care, leveraging on observational data.

Topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the following with an emphasis on novel generalizable methods applied to the healthcare domain:

• Causal discovery from multiple data sets.
• Federated causal discovery.
• Causal discovery from heterogeneous data sets.
• Transportability of causal models and inference.
• Neuro-symbolic approaches to learn from heterogeneous data sources.
• Continual learning on streams from multiple data sources.
• Computational intelligent strategies to support causal inference.
• Edge computing for decision making in healthcare.
• Integrative AI methodologies.
• Distributed inference methods.
• Continual Learning.
• Knowledge Discovery and Integration.
• Combination of deductive approaches with ML models.
• Combination of ontologies and/or knowledge-bases with ML to support decision making.

Peer Review Process:

All submitted papers will undergo a rigorous peer-review process featuring at least two reviewers. All submissions should follow the guidelines for authors available at the Journal of Biomedical Informatics website (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/yjbin). JBI’s editorial policy outlined on that page will be strictly enforced by special issue reviewers.

Note that JBI emphasizes the publication of papers that introduce innovative and generalizable methods of interest to the informatics community. Specific applications can be described to motivate the methodology being introduced, but papers that focus solely on a specific application are not suitable. A few examples of papers focused on methods previously published in JBI include: Kyrimi, et al. [1], Huang, et al. [2], Kocbek et al. [3], Houston et al. [4], García Del Valle et al. [5], Graudenzi et al. [6] and Sims et al. [7].

In particular, the authors of [1] showed the relevance of causal models and expert knowledge to develop credible models, i.e., capable of achieving good predictive performances when transported from the study cohort to the target population. Furthermore, [2] tackles the relevant issue of partially overlapping variables when data are collected from multiple data sources. This problem is extremely relevant both in theoretical and practical terms for decision making in the healthcare sector.

The contribution provided in [3] stressed the importance of working in a multi-source context by demonstrating how the linking of different repositories can improve the overall understanding of patients' conditions. Similarly, in [4] the authors extended this concept by introducing a methodology to evaluate to audit the data quality of the sources exploited by healthcare information systems. Then, in [5] the multi-source concept is transferred within the multi-modal environment and the authors surveyed the importance of considering different modalities to obtain a better disease understanding.

The works in [6] and [7] focuses on the importance of data. In [6] a data integration framework is defined for characterizing the metabolic deregulations that distinguish cancer phenotypes, by projecting RNA-seq data onto metabolic networks without the need for metabolic measurements; in [7] a biomedical informatics method is introduced that uses multiple public health data sources to perform surveillance of methadone-related adverse drug events. Interestingly, even if patient data are not linked between different data sources, results show that the integration of multiple public data sources can capture more cases and provide more clinical details than individual data sources alone.

Key requirements for JBI ML papers in addition to presenting novel methods (not simply application of existing methods to a new healthcare domain) are as follows: 1) projects must have clinicians involved in research question/problem formulation, defining input data, and assessing the results. 2) An explanation (with clinicians) of how the proposed method would fit into the clinical workflow is expected. It must be translational to practice. 3) Data sets should preferably be collected from hospitals after the research question was formulated, thus avoiding the use of available data (MIMIC) to define a very wide research problem that could potentially be answered with available open datasets (as an example: detecting if someone has COVID from Chest X-Rays would not be acceptable, as the gold standard test is the laboratory test). 4) As for explainability, SHAP values and related diagrams would not be enough: the paper should clearly describe and explain how clinicians use the visualization to make decisions. For further details please refer to https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/journal-of-biomedical-informatics/publish/guide-for-authors.

Further details available -

Submission process, Questions, and References 

My source: 

https://aixia.it/en/gruppi/hc/