EUVIMEDEuropean Health Evidence
Uhr 10/10Sources Journal Tree
Easy Demo

Lokaler Crossref-Datenbestand · journal-article

10.3390/polym8030084

CrossRef Listing of Deleted DOIs · 2000

Vollständiger Abstract

Worum geht es in dieser Arbeit?

<b>Background/Objectives:</b> Older adults may experience healthcare encounters in which their voices are discounted, redirected through family members, or interpreted through age-related assumptions about cognitive decline. Although such problems are often discussed through dignity, communication, ageism, person-centred care, or shared decision-making, this conceptual review argues that they also involve epistemic harms: harms that occur when older adults are not recognized as credible knowers of their own bodies, needs, values, histories, and care priorities. <b>Methods:</b> This article develops a conceptual and critical analysis of Fricker's account of testimonial and hermeneutical injustice, later critiques of epistemic injustice, and the nursing and gerontological literature on dignity, person-centred nursing, documentation, dementia care, and shared decision-making. <b>Results:</b> The analysis distinguishes ordinary communication failure, institutional restriction of interpretive space, testimonial injustice, and hermeneutical injustice. It identifies interacting interpersonal and institutional mechanisms through which older adults' knowledge may be discounted or rendered invisible and develops five theoretically derived principles: credibility-oriented listening, narrative recognition, supported participation, relational decision-making, and epistemic documentation. For each principle, the framework identifies the epistemic failure addressed, its added value beyond general person-centred practice, and responsibilities at both individual and organizational levels. <b>Conclusions:</b> An epistemic-justice lens does not replace dignity, person-centred care, shared decision-making, or professional judgement. It adds a focused analysis of credibility, interpretive authority, knowledge visibility, and whose account shapes care. The proposed framework is a conceptual and normative contribution that requires empirical evaluation before its effects can be established.

Abstract: PubMed · Datensatz

Bibliografischer Nachweis

Publikationsdaten

Autor:innen
Nicht angegeben
Quelle
CrossRef Listing of Deleted DOIs
Publikation
2000-01-01
Band / Ausgabe
Nicht angegeben
Seiten
Nicht angegeben
ISSN / ISBN
0849-6757
Zitationen
0 laut Crossref
Referenzen
0 hinterlegt

Zitieren

Zitierfähiger Nachweis

(2000). 10.3390/polym8030084. CrossRef Listing of Deleted DOIs. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare14162629
RIS BibTeX CSL-JSON