The IBIC – a tool for social work? Social documentation, language, and persons with psychiatric disabilities

In recent years, many municipalities in Sweden are using a standardised method – the ‘Individual’s Needs in Focus’ (IBIC) for investigating needs of social support, as recommended by the National Board of Health and Welfare. The model is based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), with a so called ‘biopsychosocial’ approach and predefined categories and classifications. The article takes a critical perspective on standardised methods in social work, specifically examining language, content, and structure in the documentation of the IBIC. We problematise how well the IBIC’s documentation fit social work in general and investigations concerning individuals with psychiatric disabilities requiring support in daily living in particular. A total of 80 investigations from four municipalities were examined in regard to language, content, and structure in relation to the context of social work. The study identified three main linguistic trends: biomedical, task-oriented, and bureaucratic language. However, none of these trends were anchored in the nomenclature of social work

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Journal of Social Work
Published
2024-10-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2024.2408659
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Social Work Education and Practice
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.71

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The IBIC – a tool for social work? Social documentation, language, and persons with psychiatric disabilities

Kristina Engwall, Gunnel Andersson
2 citations
European Journal of Social Work
Social Work Education and Practice
1.71
article

The IBIC – a tool for social work? Social documentation, language, and persons with psychiatric disabilities

Kristina Engwall, Gunnel Andersson
article en
2 citations

Abstract

In recent years, many municipalities in Sweden are using a standardised method – the ‘Individual’s Needs in Focus’ (IBIC) for investigating needs of social support, as recommended by the National Board of Health and Welfare. The model is based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), with a so called ‘biopsychosocial’ approach and predefined categories and classifications. The article takes a critical perspective on standardised methods in social work, specifically examining language, content, and structure in the documentation of the IBIC. We problematise how well the IBIC’s documentation fit social work in general and investigations concerning individuals with psychiatric disabilities requiring support in daily living in particular. A total of 80 investigations from four municipalities were examined in regard to language, content, and structure in relation to the context of social work. The study identified three main linguistic trends: biomedical, task-oriented, and bureaucratic language. However, none of these trends were anchored in the nomenclature of social work

European Journal of Social WorkVol. 28(3)
Uppsala University (SE), Stockholm University (SE)
Norges Forskningsråd, Forskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och Välfärd
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Social Work Education and Practice
1.71
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.