Hodges' Model: Welcome to the QUAD: wisdom

Hodges' model is a conceptual framework to support reflection and critical thinking. Situated, the model can help integrate all disciplines (academic and professional). Amid news items, are posts that illustrate the scope and application of the model. A bibliography and A4 template are provided in the sidebar. Welcome to the QUAD ...

Showing posts with label wisdom. Show all posts
Showing posts with label wisdom. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 28, 2026

Book: "Beyond Belief - How Evidence Shows What Really Works"

Beyond Belief: How Evidence Shows What Really Works – out April 2026
Beyond Belief

INDIVIDUAL
|
     INTERPERSONAL    :     SCIENCES               
HUMANISTIC --------------------------------------  MECHANISTIC      
SOCIOLOGY  :   POLITICAL 
|
GROUP
BEYOND BELIEF

How Evidence Shows
What Really Works
 






Beyond Belief: How Evidence Shows What Really Works is a book by science journalist Helen Pearson, published by Princeton University Press.
 
My source: 
Pearson, H. Trials that quietly changed our lives, Life&Arts, FTWeekend, 18-19 April, 2026. p.2 

Previously: 'belief' : 'evidence' : 'information disorder

Saturday, April 13, 2024

'Political sovereignty' by JFK


Individual
|
      INTERPERSONAL    :     SCIENCES               
HUMANISTIC  --------------------------------------  MECHANISTIC      
 SOCIOLOGY  :    POLITICAL 
|
Group


John F.



Kennedy


"Political sovereignty is but a mockery without the means of meeting poverty, illiteracy, and disease."


My source: 

Alan Capps, Alexandria, VA, US - FT Letters.
https://www.ft.com/content/de67db92-3e7b-45ee-b39e-0140d582306a 

Sunday, January 22, 2023

Philosophy in Pubs - Liverpool Weds 25th Jan 7.30pm

Subscribed to Philosophy in Pubs for many years, I've posted to the list also in the distant past, but I've never attended a meeting. This past week I noticed a message about a new subgroup - Young Philosophers - in Liverpool from Mike (phone numbers removed). Below, I've posted some of the online chat:

On Saturday, 14 January 2023 at 14:38:50 GMT, <info AT philosophyinpubs.co.uk> wrote:
Hi everybody,
 
Its Mike from the Keith's PIP and the young philosophers group.
I am currently re-launching the latter as a new PIP group at
Thomas Rigby's in town
(23-25 Dale St, Liverpool L2 2EZ)
 
The first meeting of the Philosophy group will be
Wednesday evening the 25th January at 7.30pm.
Please come along, all welcome, all ages.
 
If you need anymore  information, please email me (email below) or call me on ...
 
Thanks
Mike Green.
michaelljohngreen AT gmail.com 

This piqued my interest, given my love of Liverpool (born in Walton) and the question of at what age can younger people - children be introduced to Hodges' model?

I replied expressing interest in the possibility of contributing, once the group is established, or as a 'starter for 10', seeking critique as to what sense young philosophers would make of the model.

Responding with an introduction to Hodges' model, and expression of interest, Paul and Rob replied as per below, to which I've tried to add some clarification.

Rob's thoughts are very helpful. The upshot is, I'm looking f/w to a full day in Liverpool this Wednesday, meeting Mike, Paul, Rob and possibly others before the meeting starts at 7.30pm.

Paul's message (intended for me):

info AT philosophyinpubs.co.uk
Sunday, 15 January 2023 at 13:00:12 GMT
Subject:
Re: New PIP group!

Hi Mike, Peter

Yes, you seem to be part of quite a sizeable group of people on our general members/mailing list that have not gotten round to attending one of the groups yet. But that's okay, absolutely no need for apologies, your interest is appreciated anyway.

I've had a quick glance at your attachments; found what I read very interesting and would like to know more. I don't think I've heard of the Hodges' model, or at least not in relation to what we generally practice (Community of Enquiry method).

It's great that you would like to contribute or provide a session regarding the Hodges' model, but I'm not sure if doing that would fit well with this particular opening meeting of a new PIP group. Having said that, I could be very mistaken, and an introduction in the manner you mention, might be a great way to get people thinking and herald a fruitful meeting. The meeting is due to start at 7.30pm - (meetings usually take one and a half to two hours), but if you like I could meet you there half an hour earlier. Let me know.

We have something called the Enquiry Development Series (EDS) running at the moment. It's a monthly Online event which is run for PIP members and others to learn/refresh their undertanding and practices. You would be most welcome to attend.

Best regards,

Paul ...

PS: I have cc'd some members of the EDS in with this reply.

From Rob:

On 2023-01-16 12:44, fappyhealing02 AT yahoo.co.uk wrote:

Hi Everyone,

From my very limited reading on Hodge's model. It seems to be concerned with very similar issues to those of PIPs and the CofE community, which is an expression of prior analysis, critique and reflection coming from people like Dewey, Postman, Freire, Lipman and so on. I have a basic grasp of the model as a conceptual framework and a means to better care and understanding across society. What I don't seem to have picked up so much is a more fully developed methodology rooted in practice and realisation of these ideas.

This leads me wonder whether this model/framework is mainly conceptual, with limited  methodological guidance towards how the ideas in the framework are to be expressed and realised. PIPs is at the stage where it has a very successful methodology which realises and expresses in practice the ideas that Hodge points to, along with the philosophy of education eluded to earlier and various other frameworks such as the Paul and Elder model of critical thinking.

So, we have the history and philosophical education from Socrates onwards, the comes a distillation of these ideas into a framework or model, which is where we find Piaget, Bloom, Paul and Elder, along with Hodge and others. These models then have to be cashed out in practice. At this point, we are now thinking about methodology, there is of course connection, influence and overlap with the history, philosophy and subsequent frameworks. Methodologies vary from being barely formed to being well formed and robust. I would say PIPs and CofE have a well formed and somewhat robust methodological practice. It has been well tested and critiqued for over 40 years in different countries, communities and contexts. It has stood the test of time with a good pedigree. Matt Lipman was a key figure in developing a methodology out of his research into philosophy of education and various frameworks/models. However the methodology he produced to deliver in practice was something of a prototype rather than the more fully formed, finished article. Through time and careful reflection people like R Sutcliffe and Karin Muris took Lipman's methods improved and polished them into the practice we see and use 40 years later. This is of course still developing along democratic and dialogic lines.

In the case of Edward De Bonno, Paul and Elder, Illich and Dewey we find some powerful insights, some partially formed models and some fully formed models but not that much guidance on how to implement these ideas. Yes, they provide some ideas and pointers on how to go about the realisation of these things in practice but methodology on the whole is pretty sparse. I guess it's a case of focussing on a specific group of concerns comes at the cost of other concerns, though, I don't want to take this too far and slip into zero-sum thinking. Anyway, based on limited understandings I'd provisionally put Hodge in this category of well formed model, limited methodology in terms of the nuts and bolts of how to best realise the model in practice.

Questions I'm left with:

Is the distinction between model and methodology a significant and useful one here - why? Yes/No, because...?

Given our current point of development and understanding, by doing what we do, are we already cashing out a good deal of the key ideas in Hodge's model?

Could we just clarify what Hodge's model is a model of?

Do I need some help in understanding Hodge better in terms of both 'model' and 'methodology'?

This isn't to say we should not draw inspiration and ideas or take time to explore and experiment with Hodge's model, just that I need to be clearer about what it is, what it's trying to do, how it is going to do it. Once more secure with this, I feel I'd be in a better position to make more competent judgements and recommendations about its uses and benefits.

Best wishes,

Rob

My reply:

Subject: Re: New PIP group!

Thanks for the messages - just caught up I think...

I wondered originally Mike - about your young philosopher's group and once established asking the group the questions that Rob has posed and responded to.

I'm seeking critique, not proposing that Hodges' model is adopted by PIP.

The questions posed by the model - might gainfully exercise younger minds, and provide me with some pointers - which I would make clear (from ethics / consent perspective).

I greatly appreciate Rob's thoughts*.

A question I have educationally is from what age (literacy level) which Hodges' model #h2cm might be taught (discovered?).

I'd be pleased to come through on the 25th Mike and Paul, arriving a bit earlier.

I'll get to Liverpool early a.m. train and make a day of it.

As per Rob, I'm still asking these questions of the model and enjoying the journey ... so, briefly in response:

There is no methodology associated with the model, it is 'agnostic' (whatever that means).

The model is situated - so clinically, the way the model is used is influenced by the patient, client, carer, student, manager ...

The model can provide a relational ontology - it incorporates several polarities, dichotomies, oppositions and instrumentally can facilitate dialectic engagement.

It can be applied (imho) for a variety of research and philosophical stances, standpoints - Qual , Quant, Mixed-methods ... all the -isms?

As you will no doubt appreciate, in education and health care (especially) we need *evidence-based* interventions.

In seeking possible theoretical underpinnings for #h2cm think (as Rob suggests) of the model as a giant conceptual corpus (drawing from Tim Berners-Lee's giant global graph).

The axes of the model represent the (conceptual) holistic bandwidth of the situation.

The model can wax and wane as per the context (scale, scope). In a reductive sense I see the four (care) knowledge domains as four 'conceptual spaces' (Gärdenfors).

h2cm can also find a 'home' in the semantic web and in education - the idea of 'threshold concepts' (Meyer and Land).

There is another tool, but this calls for a logician - if not a totally erroneous idea?

[ Note diametric oppositions in the model: e.g.
  • public understanding of science;
  • the extent of visualization in the humanities;
  • mental health (the self) and the State (politics, law) current Psycho-Economic crisis. ]
*ROB - and all - I'd be pleased to post your thoughts / response on the blog, if this is appropriate with links and text on PIPs.

I hope this helps and look f/w to next week - thanks for your interest too.

Best to all.

Peter
====

Clearly not the last word. Look f/w to Wednesday and learning more.

Friday, March 25, 2022

"How Universities Have Betrayed Reason and Humanity—And What's to Be Done About It" c/o Nicholas Maxwell

In order to make progress towards a good, civilized world – one in which there is peace, democracy, justice, individual liberty, and sustainable prosperity, for everyone – we need to learn how to do it. That in turn requires that our institutions of learning, our universities, are rationally designed and devoted to the job. They are not. For a century or so, they have pursued knowledge and technological know-how, and have not engaged in public education about how to solve those problems of living, local and global, that we need to solve to make progress towards a better world. The pursuit of knowledge and technological know-how dissociated from a more fundamental concern to help solve problems of living has actually made possible the genesis of many of our global problems: the climate and ecological crises, the lethal character of modern war, the menace of nuclear weapons, pollution of earth, sea and air, population growth, the degradation of democracy as a result of social media and the internet. In giving priority to the pursuit of knowledge and technology, as at present, universities betray reason and humanity. We urgently need a revolution in our universities so that the basic task becomes to help humanity resolve conflicts and problems of living in increasingly cooperatively rational ways – the pursuit of knowledge being important but secondary. 

See From Knowledge to Wisdom: https://philpapers.org/rec/MAXFKT-3

See also “How Universities Have Betrayed Reason and Humanity—And What's to Be Done About It”, Frontiers, https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frsus.2021.631631/full

Best wishes

Nicholas Maxwell

Science and Technology Studies, University College London 

Website: www.ucl.ac.uk/from-knowledge-to-wisdom

Publications online: http://philpapers.org/profile/17092http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/view/people/ANMAX22.date.html

My source: 

Philos-L "The Liverpool List" https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/philosophy/philos-l/


Friday, October 01, 2021

Agnotology - (a) space for ignorance?

 Chapter 1 of Agnotology (Proctor, 2008) begins with two quotations:

“We are often unaware of the scope and structure of our ignorance. Ignorance
is not just a blank space on a person's mental map. It has contours and coher-
ence, and for all I know rules of operation as well. So as a corollary to writing
about what we know, maybe we should add getting familiar with our ignorance.”
Thomas Pynchon, 1984


“Doubt is our product.”
Brown & Williamson Tobacco Company, internal memo, 1969



The discovery of this book and its title, was quite an event.

Proctor, Robert N. and Schiebinger, Londa (Eds.). AGNOTOLOGY The Making And Unmaking Of Ignorance. (2008): Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.

 

 

Previously on W2tQ:

'ignorance'

'smoking'

Thursday, November 21, 2019

World Philosophy Day: "Why do we need evidence of mechanisms?"

December 17th 2019, 14h30-16h00

Bordeaux Pellegrin Hospital, Rheumatology Service, 12th floor

Phyllis Illari (University College London, UK)

"Why do we need evidence of mechanisms?" A PhilInBioMed seminar


Open to all


Phyllis Illari is a Senior Lecturer at University College London (Dept of Science & Technology Studies; Faculty of Maths & Physical Sciences) in the UK. She works in the philosophy of science, with particular expertise in causality, mechanisms and information.

Abstract

I will present a view of evidence of mechanisms as evidence of the activities, entities, their organization, and the phenomena they explain, using the idea of ‘minimal mechanism’ (Glennan and Illari, 2018). I will argue that this view allows us to theoretically organize an incredibly diverse array of forms of evidence and empirical practices. I will then home in on a specific way in which evidence of mechanism is crucial, arguing that it is important even for solid evidence of correlation. Any clinical study, even a well-conducted RCT, which is still one of our best methods of establishing a reliable correlation, needs decent answers to two questions: (i) what are the variables for disease, treatment and outcome? and (ii) how and when are they measured and why?

I will use the case of ‘vitamin D deficiency’ to show how important these questions are, even when they are not explicitly addressed in published results, because they are regarded as sufficiently standardised to be unimportant. Until recently, vitamin D deficiency was regarded as well-understood, reliably measurable in standardised ways, and linked to diseases such as rickets by well understood mechanisms. However, recent research has linked vitamin D deficiency to other diseases, in ways that expose the fact that different measuring techniques measure slightly different forms of Vitamin D. Those differences are now relevant.

Considering the case shows how deeply integrative our evidential pluralism needs to be, and therefore how complex our practices of reasoning about evidence are. Philosophical accounts need to be responsive to this.

For more information click here.

Best regards,

Wiebke Bretting
--
Dr. Wiebke Bretting
Project Manager ERC IDEM
ImmunoConcEpT, UMR5164
Université de Bordeaux
146 rue Léo Saignat
33076 Bordeaux
https://www.immuconcept.org/erc-idem/

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/

Saturday, February 17, 2018

Common Sense..? c/o Shlain

The phrase "common sense" has several meanings. In one, it is the wisdom of all the senses, a holistic and simultaneous grasp of multiple converging determinants. In this meaning, common sense is intuitive and is often the opposite of logic. In another meaning, it is the wisdom of more than one person. It is the result of the give-and-take of face-to-face conversation with another, which allows one to "hear oneself think." In this second meaning, common sense is wisdom generated "in common."
Shlain, L. (1998). The Alphabet Versus the Goddess: The Conflict between Word and Image. London: The Penguin Group, p.315.

Saturday, December 02, 2017

Data, Information, Knowledge defined c/o McGonigle & Mastrian

Graves and Corcoran (1989) drew from Blum (1986) to define the three concepts as follows: (1) data are discrete entities described objectively without interpretation; (2) information is data that are interpreted, organised, or structured; and (3) knowledge is information that is synthesized so that relationships are identified and formalized. Drawing on this work, Nelson (1982, 2002) defined wisdom as the appropriate application of knowledge to the management and solution of human problems.  
Data, which are processed to create information and then knowledge, may be obtained from individuals, familes, communities, and populations and the environment in which they exist. Data, information, knowledge, and wisdom are of concern to nurses in all areas of practice. For example, data derived from direct care of an individual may then be compiled across persons and aggregated for decision making by nurses, nurse administrators, or other health professionals. Further aggregation may address communities and populations. Nurse educators may create case studies using these data, and nurse researchers may access aggregated data for systematic study. pp.97-98.

McGonigle, D., Mastrian, K.G. (2012) Nursing Informatics and the Foundation of Knowledge, Second Edition. Jones & Bartlett Learning, Burlington, MA.

Fourth edition: http://www.jblearning.com/catalog/9781284121247/

See also:
Jones, P. (1996) Humans, Information, and Science, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 24(3),591-598.

Saturday, January 14, 2017

Framing a Life Animated


individual
|
INTERPERSONAL : SCIENCES
humanistic -------------------------------------------  mechanistic
SOCIOLOGY : POLITICAL
|
group-population
(mental) Life
Animated


communication  meaning

singing  dialogue

family friends relationships


documentary

activism

awareness






My source: Whitworth, D. (2016)  The autistic boy whose life was unlocked by Disney, Arts, The Times, 13 December. p.8-9.

Wednesday, April 13, 2016

Planetary Health (ii) (and the need for a global conceptual framework)

I have 5,000 words drafted on Hodges' model and threshold concepts, for which I've yet to find a home. Staying with the previous post's theme of planetary health the paper includes the following: 

A decade ago Groffman, et al., (2006) stated that ecological thresholds can be 'troublesome' in being important but in having no practical application. Threshold concepts are not, however alone; there are also threshold questions (Halldén and Lundholm, 2009). The answers to these questions are critical to global sustainability and planetary boundaries (thresholds) - an ongoing research effort (Rockström et al., 2009).

Groffman, P., Baron, J., Blett, T., et al. (2006). Ecological Thresholds: The Key to Successful Environmental Management or an Important Concept with No Practical Application? Ecosystems, 9(1), 1-13.

Halldén, O. & Lundholm C. (2009). 25-30 August. Conceptual Change and the Complexity of Learning. Threshold Questions, Meaning making and Contextuality. Paper presented at the 13th conference European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Amsterdam, Holland.

Rockström, J., W. Steffen, K. Noone, Å. et al. (2009). Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecology and Society. 14(2): 32. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art32/


See also:
Jones, P. (2008). Exploring Serres’ Atlas, Hodges’ Knowledge Domains and the Fusion of Informatics and Cultural Horizons, IN Kidd, T., Chen, I. (Eds.) Social Information Technology Connecting Society and Cultural Issues, Idea Group Publishing, Inc. Chap. 7, pp. 96-109.

Tuesday, April 12, 2016

Planetary Health (i) (and the need for a global conceptual framework)

(with thanks to Global Health Now)

In a pointed challenge, Lancet editor-in-chief Richard Horton warned Consortium of Universities for Global Health conference attendees Saturday that an exclusive focus on improving health will fail.

Horton argued instead for planetary health.

“We have to cross outside of health and think about the relationship between health and other dimensions being defined as sustainability,”
Horton said, in a keynote address at the annual CUGH conference, which opened Saturday in San Francisco and attracted more than 1,800 attendees from around the world.

Citing the work of a Lancet Commission that published a 2014 manifesto, Horton argued that the global health community and others need to embrace planetary health. “Our vision is for a planet that nourishes and sustains the diversity of life with which we coexist and on which we depend,” Horton and others wrote in the manifesto.

Brian W. Simpson, Global Health NOW

Full text:

http://www.globalhealthnow.org/news/horton-to-cugh-planetary-health-is-the-solution
[ See below: PJ ]

Best wishes, Neil

Let's build a future where people are no longer dying for lack of healthcare knowledge - Join HIFA: www.hifa2015.org


https://www.globalhealthnow.org/2016-04/horton-cugh-planetary-health-solution

Previously on W2tQ:

One mind, many minds - ONE PLANET. One need, many needs - ONE PLANET: what price stability?

Exoplanets, exobiology, exocortex, exocare ...?

Notes (ii) from Paipa Conference: Q & A

Blog Action Day: h2cm around the water whole

TED: Nic Marks - The Happy Planet Index

Saturday, March 22, 2014

Over Here 2: Smart Thinking or Who do you think you are?

Of all the things that tend to merge, overlap, then appear discrete only to dissolve again we can see illness, health and well-being. To these we can add - self-help, intelligent self-help, various forms of literacy (3R's, emotional, economic, information, visual, health) and self-care.

I am sure that Hodges' model can help improve health literacy and general reflective abilities. There are some really difficult-to-reach audiences, clients and communities out there. The challenge is not just spreading the word:

A crude but generally accurate definition of what makes a smart thinking book is anything you could easily imagine being the subject of a TED talk. The recipe is to find a leading expert and get him (alas, still more often than her) to write about an idea in his field that is interesting to a wider audience and which he believes - or at least claims - can help us change our lives for the better. It has been called intelligent self-help, but since most potential readers would not appreciate the implied association with the dumber varieties, "smart thinking" has a certain advantage. ... FT Weekend. p.8
- but demonstration too.

My source: Julian Baggini, Wisdom set to work, Life & Arts, Financial Times. March 8-9, 2014, p.8.

Wednesday, January 01, 2014

Book review: "Nursing Informatics and the Foundation of Knowledge" (long book - long review)

Happy New Year to everyone!

Last spring I requested a book for review and received three c/o and with thanks to Jones & Bartlett Learning Nursing. Finally, I've picked up the second - and about time it seems - as on this first day of 2014 the publishers are planning the 3rd edition. This book provided a break from virtual matters being a door-stop of a book; 538 pages, excluding abbreviations, glossary and index. In addition to this physical rendering the publishers emphasize an online presence for this and other books. Inside the cover there is a card with an access code to unlock the companion website for online resources for readers, students and lecturers. The account setup is straightforward and there are additional student exercises beyond those in the book.

Informatics is by definition a challenge for authors and publishers. Even though published in 2011 - 2012 time is at work. From the outset then the team involved in this text are to be congratulated on what is a monumental task in scale and time.

The foundation of knowledge in the title refers to the adopted conceptual framework - the foundation of knowledge model, which is illustrated at the start of the book's sections and especially section I on the building blocks of nursing informatics.

The foundation of knowledge model was itself quite a hook for me.
The model includes bits, bytes, data and information and from this arise:
  • knowledge acquisition
  • knowledge processing
  • knowledge generation
  • and knowledge dissemination
- with all of these influenced by and influencing feedback (there is an illustration in the sample chapter). The model describes people as information systems. Although the diagram presents a structure for the model, and it fits this informatics context very well and provides a link throughout the book it is not convincing in terms of subjects, agents, and knowledge disciplines. Admittedly the foundation of knowledge model is high level like Hodges’ model. Similarly, it is not prescriptive in terms of how events, phenomena are characterised. Data, information, knowledge and wisdom are however, the most fuzzy of concepts and subject to ongoing philosophical debate. I'll reflect a little more on this later. As already noted the model works here and I see online that a couple of students (and no doubt a great many more) have utilised the model in e-portfolios.

Each chapter has a listing of key terms, which are highlighted in the text. There are reflective questions at the end of each chapters. Chapters are concise, well referenced across various media and are all accessible and evident of a great editorship. There are a couple of longer treatments of certain and well chosen topics. Within chapters there are brief diversions in boxes on a related theme, for example in chapter 3, box 3.2 on ‘storage capacities’. I’d almost forgotten about EPROM and RAM, even though I used to purchase computer programs on EPROMS and ROMS in the 90s. Although abbreviations still abound, these abbreviations have become rather transparent now - and may say more about the generational scope of the authors - including this one? If these are going to be included then where is ‘GPU’, ‘SSD’ …? This is a difficult balance to strike, but mention of these struck me as antiquated and date the text. ('GPU' is hardly new - 1998 c/o Nvidia)

With two major companies referred to early on, open source is explained on page 43 and in the examples of software programs that are listed. The book is courageous in several respects introducing the model, listing software and specific technology examples, some of which can be brief in terms of market longevity. The emergence of the cloud is discussed and provides a current flavour, as with usability (‘UX’). Although the authors are clearly leaders and advocates for nursing informatics and the technologic, the enthusiasm is tempered.

The limits and complexity of AI artificial intelligence are raised in addition to the revolutionary progress. Chapter 4 on cognitive informatics I found personally fascinating, as it reassures me about my interest in the potential of combining conceptual spaces, threshold concepts with Hodges’ model. As a result I previously posted items from the book about cognitive informatics and another relating Beauchamp and Childress’s four principles of health care ethics to Hodges’ model.

Chapter 5 continues the consideration of the limits and challenges posed by technology in exploring the theoretical approaches to health care ethics. The standards for e-health ethics will now be tested with the fate of the .health domain (deliberated online at HIFA2015 to follow...). I wonder if this debate will figure in the 3rd edition? Clearly there are implications for the governance of such a domain. As the chapter points out many ethical e-health standards are voluntary.

As an individual and a reviewer of book with international scope and a discipline with international global aspirations you are acutely aware of your parochial situation. When I look at the UK (Northwest England!) and nursing informatics it seems, with some exceptions to have failed to make a mark in nursing. Yes, colleagues and I use an electronic health record, but there is so much more that could be provided in terms of purposes, functionality and reports. The majority of student nurses I speak to do not seem to be primed let alone tutored for the wider informatics world they will enter as practitioners. So much more that could be done with mobile technology, caseload management tools, research tools. Perhaps this is why as I read of - the use of decision support systems and expert systems (p.77) – I thought “Get real!”. How accessible are such tools to the majority of nurses? Speaking from Wigan Pier at least, if it is 'nursing informatics' you seek then you must be westward bound. It appears there is quite a difference in the esteem of nursing informatics in the USA and UK? - and my review reflects this. Jocularity aside there are two serious points here.

1. The book is clearly USA centric, but it really is relevant to readers elsewhere (I thought there might be a problem registering on the website, but there was no .
2. The other point concerns activism.

When there is an opportunity should we advocate for nursing? Is there scope for this within a nursing informatics text? Even in ‘developed’ nations we should take nothing for granted be that the UK - rickets, TB, sexually transmitted diseases in older adults, obesity; or the United States with the potential impact of climate change and health inequality (MacKenzie, 2013, America's hidden epidemic of tropical diseases). The complexity of nursing and health is also apparent while reading that informatics can serve to check compliance with antibiotic regimes, you simultaneously reflect on the need to reduce the general prescribing of antibiotics and the correct administration and management when they are utilized.

My interest in and exposure to informatics and the humanistic-mechanistic axis within Hodges’ model brought me to the socio-technical literature. Even though socio-technical aspects of nursing and nursing informatics abound implicitly in the book (chapter 6, page 100 and elsewhere – chapter 16) ‘sociotechnical’ or ‘socio-technical’ does not have a place in the index. Although they rarely come across it – hence my thoughts above – I explain something of classification and coding to the student nurses who visit our team. Chapter 7 is a very informative contribution on this subject by one of several international contributors (all listed at the book’s start). How can nursing informatics make an impact if nursing students are not aware of the existence of nursing terminologies and approaches – enumerative and ontological - to the same? Nurses should be aware of the international standards associated with their profession - nursing terminologies included. Chapter 8 on nursing roles, competencies and skills prompted me to wonder about other forms of informatics and to what extent there can (should) be dialogue between these other disciplines?

In, Information and Knowledge needs of nurses in the 21st century (chapter 9), as an individual practitioner you are always situated (p.531) in a local nursing experience. I think this is where the model needs to be extended to facilitate the incorporation of local, global and glocal perspectives. Surely informatic's role as the latest technical means to communicate across a diaspora and it seems create a reverse diaspora through online communities and virtual worlds is worthy of a political stance? Global initiatives such as Health Information for All 2015 (what year is it next and still so much to do...) and other groups (maternal and infant care) need nursing's support and this extended information-informatics awareness (wisdom!) might also pay local and national dividends?

Chapter 10 is lengthy as befits legislative matters which nevertheless maintain the readable tone, clearly there is an ongoing evaluation by systems suppliers and users on the potential of the Cloud (Chapter 17). Chapter 11 was a nice surprise and the impact of which I have already referred to in e-portfolios. Individuals act as their own portal – p.187. This is a subject that (I hope) will occupy me for the next couple of years. The use of e-media by nurses for reflective commentary using web publishing tools is addressed very well. Having just ordered a second hand copy of Etienne Wenger’s book on communities of practice I find this discussed here:
In the future it is hoped that the use of communities of practice in nursing will grow beyond knowledge sharing and promote more knowledge discovery and sense making. p.189.
I’m not sure if e-portfolios have affected the EU populace with the rapidity and extent expected (by 2010), but there is a series of ongoing conferences dedicated to the cause. In the 1990s and early 2000s you could not miss the emphasis on benefits realization. If this concept has had its day what exactly happened? (There is no longer a need to prove the worth, potential of the computer at the bedside, nurses station.) We should still focus on outcomes as noted in several  chapters.

The sections also take on a practical – application focus across administration and nursing functions. Open source is further examined p.212. If SQL is mentioned would it help to acknowledge the development of noSQL approaches? Memory and processing power (for indexing) are less of a constraint on systems now. There is another challenge presented to editors: is 2004 really a ‘recent’ study? ‘Recent’ and its synonyms ‘currently’ need to be checked throughout the book and revised accordingly. The same applies to references to demographics and changes in nursing numbers (p.320-321). The trends in the numbers are established and remain, but perhaps there are more up-to-date sources? Throughout the book there are also case studies and pointers to research that provide practical and personal insights to the subject at hand.

While the context is nursing and informatics I think the discussion on ‘health literacy’ requires a critical review. It seems that health literacy may be being construed as synonymous with health technology literacy, computer and information literacy which are also noted in the text. There is admittedly a great deal of overlap.

‘Health literacy’ needs to be considered before a specific health problem arises – it is too late then. Health literacy does not mean, should not be equated with the deployment and use of e-tech applied to people with diabetes, coronary heart disease. Is this specific health education aimed at self-care, relapse prevention, staying well? Is health literacy concerned with positive health?

I’m sure the authors – editors are only too aware of this but this understanding of the wider context of ‘health literacy’ as a field of research and practice is not conveyed at present. I also don't necessarily see a wiki as a search tool, yes you can search a wiki but it is a type of repository and as such the effectiveness of a search must depend on the contributions made and the preceding searches. Perhaps a dedicated wiki could become a form e-grey literature?

A highpoint for this reviewer was to read: Learning is a multispatial function, … (p.406). It certainly is. The discussion on creating learning resources is an excellent introduction, especially on using the electronic health record as the learning resource.

In considering the future chapter 29 does not explicitly utilize the framework of knowledge. This may provide an opportunity to extend the framework to more readily integrate bio-psychosocial-political and spiritual perspectives through time. The framework of knowledge within informatics is a great resource. As mentioned this drew my interest to the book, in 1996 I sought to relate informatics concepts to nursing and mental health (redundancy, entropy.... see bibliography). Whatever the differences between the USA and UK nursing informatics the framework might benefit from a way to integrate context, specific concepts and practices, self-care, interprofessional education and wisdom.

This is a great book, one that is also courageous in its scope and execution. The third edition will be very well worth not just purchasing, but applying. Thanks again to Jones & Bartlett Learning for this copy.

MacKenzie, D. (2013). America's hidden epidemic of tropical diseases, New Scientist. 11 December 2013, 2947.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22029473.200-americas-hidden-epidemic-of-tropical-diseases.html?full=true
 
McGonigle, D., Mastrian, K.G. (2012) Nursing Informatics and the Foundation of Knowledge, Second Edition. Jones & Bartlett Learning, Burlington, MA.

Monday, February 07, 2011

h2cm: philosophy of science - analytical AND dialectical Refinetti, R. (1989).

"For centuries, philosophers have discussed whether knowledge progresses analytically or dialectically. In the Cartesian tradition of starting with simple concepts and then building up more complex concepts [4], the idea of science as a gradual accumulation of small pieces of knowledge was put forward by Auguste Comte [5]. This constitutes an analytical view of the progress of knowledge. On the other hand, Hegel proposed that knowledge grows as a whole, so that contradictions between opposing ideas are solved (and disperse pieces of knowledge are integrated) at each stage of the dialectical progress of knowledge [6]. This constitutes a dialectical view of the progress of knowledge.

The partial correctness of both the analytical view of Comte and the dialectical view of Hegel have been acknowledged for many years. Wisdom from both views can be found in the writings of many contemporary philosophers of science." Refinetti, R. (1989) p.583.



.... and can also be found within the structure and potential content of the Health Care Domains Model. Goethe in his own way(s) of seeing recognised the same...


Refinetti, R. (1989). Information processing as a central issue in philosophy of science, Information Processing & Management, 25, 5, 583-584.

Tuesday, May 12, 2009

Int. Nursing and Nursing Informatics Day: the big 'C' and little 'c' in nursing

12th May is International Nurses Day and International Nursing Informatics Day: so have a great day!

Even though the vast majority of people use information and communication technology in their work - and this includes nurses - there are many within and without the profession who will wonder what has nursing to do with 'IT'?

Surely 'nursing informatics' is being opportunistic in piggy-backing on the day to celebrate nursing; after all nursing is about people NOT technology? Well that is of course true, technology is a means to an end not an end in itself for nursing. Perhaps there is another way of coming at this and it lies right at the heart of -

I.c.T.
AND
nursing

It is of course: COMMUNICATION

As I have described on in several posts on W2tQ communication is the means by which health and social care professions differentiate and so define themselves. Communication practices, processes, purposes and policies also provide the foundation for standards and governance. Communication is also at the heart of I.T. and various informatics disciplines. Informatics has benefited from communication models such as the Open Systems Interconnection Reference Model (OSI Reference Model or OSI Model). Nursing and health curricula also stress communication although of course in markedly different contexts.

So where is the glue that enable nurses and informatics to spend this Day together (the degree of harmony is another post)?

The glue for me is the concept of information and the associated concepts of data and knowledge. To which we add a demographic nod to wisdom.

So to all nurses the world over whether you are in nursing, informatics or hopefully you 'work' in both: have an infoeau riche day!