Cover not available

Article published In: Argumentation and Patient Centered Care
Edited by Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Roosmaryn Pilgram and Nanon Labrie
[Journal of Argumentation in Context 7:2] 2018
► pp. 120–137

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

The potential of argumentation theory in enhancing patient-centered care in breaking bad news encounters

 | Tel Aviv University, Israel
 | Tel Aviv University, Israel
Published online: 12 October 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.18023.kar
Abstract
Recent research on medical communication discusses the role of argumentation in building physician-patient consensus to enhance shared decision-making. This paper focuses on the potential of using argumentation to establish the preliminary step of shared understanding of the diagnosis. This understanding is important in helping patients accept the disease and in increasing their involvement in care. We conducted an in-depth analysis of an observation of a medical encounter, triangulated with interviews with all participants, to illustrate how the lack of clear information and argumentation concerning the disease hindered the patient’s understanding and acceptance of it. This in turn led to difficulties in building a trusting relationship and in reaching treatment decisions. We discuss how using argumentation focused on the disease can allow a fruitful patient-centered discussion about the medical condition and treatment options.
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Method
    • Study population and background information
    • Data collection, design, and instruments
    • Ethics
    • Analysis
  • Findings
    • The encounter
  • Discussion
    • Can argumentation theory and PCC work together?
    • Practical implications, future needs, and limitations
  • Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Note
  • References
References (29)
References
Charles, Cathy, Amiram Gafni, and Tim Whelan. 1997. “Shared Decision-Making in the Medical Encounter: What Does It Mean? (or It Takes at Least Two to Tango).” Social Science and Medicine 44 (5):681–92. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Eemeren, Frans H. and Rob Grootendorst. 1984. Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions: A Theoretical Model for the Analysis of Discussions Directed towards Solving Conflicts of Opinion. Dordrecht: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectical Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Eemeren, Frans H. and A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans. 2016. Argumentation: Analysis and Evaluation. Taylor & Francis. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Elwyn, Glyn et al. 2014. “Collaborative Deliberation: A Model for Patient Care.” Patient Education and Counseling 97 (2):158–64. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Epstein, Ronald M. and Richard L. Street. 2011. “Shared Mind: Communication, Decision Making, and Autonomy in Serious Illness.” The Annals of Family Medicine 9 (5):454–61. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Karnieli-Miller, Orit. 2006. “The Experiencing of Breaking and Receiving Bad News on Chronic Illness during Adolescence: An Insider’s Perspective of Adolescents, Parents and Physicians.” (doctoral dissertation) University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel. (In Hebrew).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Karnieli-Miller, Orit and Zvi Eisikovits. 2009. “Physician as Partner or Salesman? Shared Decision-Making in Real-Time Encounters.” Social Science and Medicine 69 (1):1–8. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Karnieli-Miller, Orit, Perla Werner, Judith Aharon-Peretz, and Shmuel Eidelman. 2007. “Dilemmas in the (un)veiling of the Diagnosis of Alzheimer’s Disease: Walking an Ethical and Professional Tight Rope.” Patient Education and Counseling 67 (3):307–14. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Karnieli-Miller, Orit, Perla Werner, Galit Neufeld-Kroszynski, and Shmuel Eidelman. 2012. “Are You Talking to Me?! An Exploration of the Triadic Physician-Patient-Companion Communication within Memory Clinics Encounters.” Patient Education and Counseling 88 (3):381–90. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Labrie, Nanon H. M. and Peter J. Schulz. 2015. “Exploring the Relationships between Participatory Decision-Making, Visit Duration, and General Practitioners’ Provision of Argumentation to Support Their Medical Advice: Results from a Content Analysis.” Patient Education and Counseling 98 (5):572–77. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Labrie, Nanon and Peter J. Schulz. 2014. “Does Argumentation Matter? A Systematic Literature Review on the Role of Argumentation in Doctor–Patient Communication.” Health Communication 29 (10):996–1008. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leplege, Alain et al. 2007. “Person-Centredness: Conceptual and Historical Perspectives.” Disability and Rehabilitation 29 (20–21):1555–65. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mead, Nicola and Peter Bower. 2000. “Patient-Centredness: A Conceptual Framework and Review of the Empirical Literature.” Social Science and Medicine 51 (7):1087–1110. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meitar, Dafna, Orit Karnieli-Miller, and Shmuel Eidelman. 2009. “The Impact of Senior Medical Students’ Personal Difficulties on Their Communication Patterns in Breaking Bad News.” Academic Medicine 84 (11):1582–94. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moustakas, Clark. 1994. Phenomenological Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rivera, Francisco Javier Uribe and Elizabeth Artmann. 2015. “Argumentação E Comunicação Médico-Paciente: Comparando Os Enfoques Da Pragma-Dialética de Toulmin E a Sociolinguística Americana.” Cadernos de Saúde Pública 31 (12):2577–87. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rubinelli, Sara. 2013. “Rational versus Unreasonable Persuasion in Doctor–patient Communication : A Normative Account.” Patient Education and Counseling 92 (3):296–301. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rubinelli, Sara and Peter J. Schulz. 2006. “‘Let Me Tell You Why!’. When Argumentation in Doctor–Patient Interaction Makes a Difference.” Argumentation 20 (3):353–75. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rubinelli, Sara and Claudia Zanini. 2012. “Teaching Argumentation Theory to Doctors: Why and What.” Journal of Argumentation in Context 1 (1):66–80. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Salmon, Peter. 2015. “Argumentation and Persuasion in Patient-Centred Communication.” Patient Education and Counseling, 98 (5):543–44. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schulz, Peter J. and Sara Rubinelli. 2006. “Healthy Arguments for Literacy in Health.” Paper presented at the AAAI Spring Symposium on Argumentation for Consumers of Healthcare, Palo Alto, CA, March 2006.
Seawright, Jason and John Gerring. 2008. “Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research: A Menu of Qualitative and Quantitative Options.” Political Research Quarterly 61 (2):294–308. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Strauss, Anselm and Juliet Corbin. 1990. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tojek, Tina M., Mark A. Lumley, Michelle Corlis, Steven Ondersma, and Vasundhara Tolia. 2002. “Maternal Correlates of Health Status in Adolescents with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.” Journal of Psychosomatic Research 52 (3):173–79. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wirtz, Veronika, Alan Cribb, and Nick Barber. 2006. “Patient–doctor Decision-Making about Treatment within the consultation – A Critical Analysis of Models.” Social Science and Medicine 62 (1):116–24. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zanini, Claudia A. and Sara Rubinelli. 2012. “Using Argumentation Theory to Identify the Challenges of Shared Decision-Making When the Doctor and the Patient Have a Difference of Opinion.” Journal of Public Health Research 1 (2): 165–69. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zanini, Claudia, Piercarlo Sarzi-Puttini, Fabiola Atzeni, Manuela Di Franco, and Sara Rubinelli. 2015. “Building Bridges between Doctors and Patients: The Design and Pilot Evaluation of a Training Session in Argumentation for Chronic Pain Experts.” BMC Medical Education 151:89. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Labrie, Nanon H.M., Anne A.M.W. van Kempen, Marleen Kunneman, Sylvia A. Obermann-Borst, Liesbeth M. van Vliet & Nicole R. van Veenendaal
2025. Effects of reasoned treatment decision-making on parent-related outcomes: Results from a video-vignette experiment in neonatal care. Patient Education and Counseling 133 ► pp. 108625 ff. DOI logo
Akkermans, Aranka, Sanne Prins, Amber S. Spijkers, Jean Wagemans, Nanon H. M. Labrie, Dick L. Willems, Marcus J. Schultz, Thomas G. V. Cherpanath, Job B. M. van Woensel, Marc van Heerde, Anton H. van Kaam, Moniek van de Loo, Anne Stiggelbout, Ellen M. A. Smets & Mirjam A. de Vos
2023. Argumentation in end-of-life conversations with families in Dutch intensive care units: a qualitative observational study. Intensive Care Medicine 49:4 ► pp. 421 ff. DOI logo
Abdalazim Dafallah, Mumen, Esraa Ahmed Ragab, Mahmoud Hussien Salih, Wail Nuri Osman, Roaa Omer Mohammed, Mugtaba Osman, Mohamed H. Taha & Mohamed H. Ahmed
2020. Breaking bad news: Awareness and practice among Sudanese doctors. AIMS Public Health 7:4 ► pp. 758 ff. DOI logo
Akkermans, Aranka, Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Nanon H. M. Labrie, Inge Henselmans & Hanneke W. M. van Laarhoven
2019. Characteristics of argumentation in consultations about palliative systemic treatment for advanced cancer. In Argumentation in Actual Practice [Argumentation in Context, 17], ► pp. 237 ff. DOI logo
Brummernhenrich, Benjamin & Regina Jucks
2019. “Get the shot, now!” Disentangling content-related and social cues in physician–patient communication. Health Psychology Open 6:1 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue