Group Judgment and the Medical Consensus Conference

摘要: Publisher Summary This chapter presents general discussion of the social epistemics group judgment and various aspects NIH Consensus Development Conference Program its development over time. Contemporary moral political philosophers make use more prominently than epistemologists science, often writing “deliberative democracy” or “discursive democracy.” It is suggested that one functions consensus conferences to put some particular human faces onto formal results and, moreover, support importance individual clinician by pointing out classes judgments should be made on a “case case” basis. Most time, especially in United States, medical are rhetorical devices, designed (with less success) close gap between research practice. The appearance objectivity (whatever reality is) presence trust essential for do this work. may decrease if when clinicians public become trusting evidence-based medicine perhaps also, suspicious deliberation.