Home Linguistics & Semiotics Same evidence, different meanings: Transformation of textual evidence in hospital new drugs committees
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Same evidence, different meanings: Transformation of textual evidence in hospital new drugs committees

  • K. Neil Jenkings

    K. Neil Jenkings is a Senior Researcher at the Sowerby Centre for Health Informatics (SCHIN) at the University of Newcastle. His interests include the use of artifacts in situated activities. His doctorate from the University of Nottingham was an ethnomethodological study of artifacts in legal activities. His recent studies have been in the area of health informatics.

    EMAIL logo
    and Nick Barber

    Nick Barber is Professor of the Practice of Pharmacy at the School of Pharmacy, University of London. His interests are in decisions about medicines and the consequent actions. His particular interest is medication errors.

    EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: May 29, 2006
Text & Talk
From the journal Volume 26 Issue 2

Abstract

This paper investigates members’ practices at Drug and Therapeutic Committee (DTC) meetings. It describes situated practices involving textual and other forms of ‘evidence’ considered by committee members at two DTC sites dealing with the managed entry of a single pharmaceutical product (clopidogrel). It investigates the locally situated textual activities of committees and members; issues that evidence-based medicine (EBM) programs ignore in their assumption that decision-making can, and should, be a straightforward logical process involving the reading, understanding, and evaluation of scientific data unambiguously from a text. It describes the actual usage of written textual information by committees and individuals within them, as sophisticated reflexive workplace activities. Taking an ethnomethodological orientation, this paper shows how the same clinical study can result in different activities and discussions. This is not only because of different ‘readings’ by personnel in different places, at different times, and with different local concerns, but also due to the representational formats in which the study exists as a text document and object, i.e., that ‘evidence’ does not remain uniform across various sites.


1Address for correspondence: SCHIN, University of Newcastle, Bede House, All Saints Business Centre, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 2ES, UK
2Address for correspondence: Department of Practice and Policy, The School of Pharmacy, 29 Brunswick Sq, London WC1N 1AX, UK

About the authors

K. Neil Jenkings

K. Neil Jenkings is a Senior Researcher at the Sowerby Centre for Health Informatics (SCHIN) at the University of Newcastle. His interests include the use of artifacts in situated activities. His doctorate from the University of Nottingham was an ethnomethodological study of artifacts in legal activities. His recent studies have been in the area of health informatics.

Nick Barber

Nick Barber is Professor of the Practice of Pharmacy at the School of Pharmacy, University of London. His interests are in decisions about medicines and the consequent actions. His particular interest is medication errors.

Published Online: 2006-05-29
Published in Print: 2006-02-20

© Walter de Gruyter

Downloaded on 24.1.2026 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/TEXT.2006.008/pdf
Scroll to top button