Difference between revisions of "Karim2015"
ElliottHoey (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=INCOLLECTION |Author(s)=Khalid Karim; |Title=The Value of Conversation Analysis: A Child Psychiatrist’s Perspective |Editor(s)=Michelle O'Reilly; Jessic...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{BibEntry | {{BibEntry | ||
|BibType=INCOLLECTION | |BibType=INCOLLECTION | ||
| − | |Author(s)=Khalid Karim; | + | |Author(s)=Khalid Karim; |
|Title=The Value of Conversation Analysis: A Child Psychiatrist’s Perspective | |Title=The Value of Conversation Analysis: A Child Psychiatrist’s Perspective | ||
| − | |Editor(s)=Michelle O'Reilly; Jessica Nina Lester; | + | |Editor(s)=Michelle O'Reilly; Jessica Nina Lester; |
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Child mental health; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Child mental health; |
|Key=Karim2015 | |Key=Karim2015 | ||
| + | |Publisher=Palgrave Macmillan | ||
|Year=2015 | |Year=2015 | ||
| − | |Booktitle=The Palgrave Handbook of Child Mental Health | + | |Language=English |
| + | |Address=London | ||
| + | |Booktitle=The Palgrave Handbook of Child Mental Health: Discourse and Conversation Studies | ||
|Pages=25-41 | |Pages=25-41 | ||
|URL=http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-137-42831-8_2#page-1 | |URL=http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-137-42831-8_2#page-1 | ||
|DOI=10.1007/978-1-137-42831-8_2 | |DOI=10.1007/978-1-137-42831-8_2 | ||
|Abstract=The exponential growth of information available on the Internet, together with the increased volume of published literature produced daily, has led to many great strides in both academic and clinical progress. While a proportion of this literature has had significant impact on the research arena, on health matters only a limited amount gets translated into clinical practice. Nonetheless, this translation is essential for subsequent improvements in care. However, with this volume of research available, it is increasingly difficult to adequately appreciate all of the research which is pertinent to a particular field. As a clinician, there are multiple sources of information presented in a variety of settings, but the pressures from other aspects of work create problems in the ability to adequately incorporate research into practice. Consequently, much research goes unnoticed and there is a tendency for individuals to remain quite narrowly focused, exploring only the classical approaches to which they are familiar. In addition, the drive to utilise what is described as evidence-based approaches, which are often a synthesis of randomised controlled trials, further exacerbates this issue. This obviously leads to a situation where certain methodologies can seem to be much less relevant and therefore any conclusions drawn from them have the potential to be ignored in the clinical world. | |Abstract=The exponential growth of information available on the Internet, together with the increased volume of published literature produced daily, has led to many great strides in both academic and clinical progress. While a proportion of this literature has had significant impact on the research arena, on health matters only a limited amount gets translated into clinical practice. Nonetheless, this translation is essential for subsequent improvements in care. However, with this volume of research available, it is increasingly difficult to adequately appreciate all of the research which is pertinent to a particular field. As a clinician, there are multiple sources of information presented in a variety of settings, but the pressures from other aspects of work create problems in the ability to adequately incorporate research into practice. Consequently, much research goes unnoticed and there is a tendency for individuals to remain quite narrowly focused, exploring only the classical approaches to which they are familiar. In addition, the drive to utilise what is described as evidence-based approaches, which are often a synthesis of randomised controlled trials, further exacerbates this issue. This obviously leads to a situation where certain methodologies can seem to be much less relevant and therefore any conclusions drawn from them have the potential to be ignored in the clinical world. | ||
| − | |||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 04:14, 5 July 2018
| Karim2015 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | INCOLLECTION |
| Key | Karim2015 |
| Author(s) | Khalid Karim |
| Title | The Value of Conversation Analysis: A Child Psychiatrist’s Perspective |
| Editor(s) | Michelle O'Reilly, Jessica Nina Lester |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Child mental health |
| Publisher | Palgrave Macmillan |
| Year | 2015 |
| Language | English |
| City | London |
| Month | |
| Journal | |
| Volume | |
| Number | |
| Pages | 25-41 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1007/978-1-137-42831-8_2 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | The Palgrave Handbook of Child Mental Health: Discourse and Conversation Studies |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
The exponential growth of information available on the Internet, together with the increased volume of published literature produced daily, has led to many great strides in both academic and clinical progress. While a proportion of this literature has had significant impact on the research arena, on health matters only a limited amount gets translated into clinical practice. Nonetheless, this translation is essential for subsequent improvements in care. However, with this volume of research available, it is increasingly difficult to adequately appreciate all of the research which is pertinent to a particular field. As a clinician, there are multiple sources of information presented in a variety of settings, but the pressures from other aspects of work create problems in the ability to adequately incorporate research into practice. Consequently, much research goes unnoticed and there is a tendency for individuals to remain quite narrowly focused, exploring only the classical approaches to which they are familiar. In addition, the drive to utilise what is described as evidence-based approaches, which are often a synthesis of randomised controlled trials, further exacerbates this issue. This obviously leads to a situation where certain methodologies can seem to be much less relevant and therefore any conclusions drawn from them have the potential to be ignored in the clinical world.
Notes
