Difference between revisions of "Webb-vomLehn-Heath-Gibson-Evans2013"
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) m |
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|Author(s)=Helena Webb; Dirk vom Lehn; Christian Heath; Will Gibson; Bruce J. W. Evans | |Author(s)=Helena Webb; Dirk vom Lehn; Christian Heath; Will Gibson; Bruce J. W. Evans | ||
|Title=The problem with “problems”: The case of openings in optometry consultations | |Title=The problem with “problems”: The case of openings in optometry consultations | ||
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Opening sequences; Optometry; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Opening sequences; Optometry; Medical consultations; |
|Key=Webb-vomLehn-Heath-Gibson-Evans2013 | |Key=Webb-vomLehn-Heath-Gibson-Evans2013 | ||
|Year=2013 | |Year=2013 | ||
Latest revision as of 04:13, 23 July 2017
| Webb-vomLehn-Heath-Gibson-Evans2013 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Webb-vomLehn-Heath-Gibson-Evans2013 |
| Author(s) | Helena Webb, Dirk vom Lehn, Christian Heath, Will Gibson, Bruce J. W. Evans |
| Title | The problem with “problems”: The case of openings in optometry consultations |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Opening sequences, Optometry, Medical consultations |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2013 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Research on Language and Social Interaction |
| Volume | 46 |
| Number | 1 |
| Pages | 65–83 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1080/08351813.2012.753724 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This article contributes to conversation analytic understanding of openings in health-care consultations. It focuses on the case of optometry: a form of health-care practice in which an optometrist conducts checks of a patient's vision and eye health. Patients are advised to attend regularly for routine assessments and can also request a specific appointment at any time. Analysis of a corpus of 66 consultations shows what happens when the optometrist's opening question solicits the client's “problems” with their eyes. We find three types of patient response. Patients who have requested a specific appointment (most often) report a problem with their eyes and establish a problem-purpose encounter. Patients attending for a routinely timed appointment either report no problems and establish a routine-assessment purpose, or if they do have a problem, they delay reporting it or downplay it. We track through what happens subsequently. The findings have practical implications for diagnosis and treatment.
Notes
