Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Scopus||Web of Science®||Altmetric|
|Title:||Three approaches to chronic fatigue syndrome in the United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada: Lessons for democratic policy|
|Citation:||Big Picture Bioethics: Developing Democratic Policy in Contested Domains, 2016 / Dodds, S., Ankeny, R. (ed./s), vol.16, Ch.11, pp.227-243|
|Series/Report no.:||The International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology; 16|
|Rachel A. Ankeny and Fiona J. Mackenzie|
|Abstract:||Decisions about diagnostic categories through clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) represent a central type of informal policy-making which affect the scope of publicly-regulated health services and directions for future research. We examine the development of three diverse sets of CPGs for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) in the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia in order to examine diverse approaches to the development of such guidelines by medical professionals and other ‘experts’ in concert with inputs from the public, particularly those affected by the disease condition. We argue that the CPGs formulated for CFS in the United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada reflect three contrasting modes of policy development, and that the differential levels of acceptance of these guidelines by a range of relevant parties provide guidance as to which mode of policy development is likely to be most effective and acceptable particularly in the domain of controversial or contested domains within medicine.|
|Rights:||© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016|
|Appears in Collections:||Aurora harvest 8|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.