Pellegrino and Thomasma’s Anatomy of Clinical Judgments Revisited

In 1981, Edmund Pellegrino and David Thomasma published A Philosophical Basis of Medical Practice. In this work, they situated the process of clinical judgment in the clinical encounter between an individual doctor and their patient. The encounter revolves around three questions: What can be wrong? What can be done? And what should be done for this patient? They analyzed the complete process of clinical reasoning involving both technical and ethical aspects. Pellegrino and Thomasma's subsequent work focused more on professionalism and ethics, while more recent analysis of clinical decision-making has been in the realm of psychology rather than along philosophical lines, particularly in the use of dual-process theory. Here we seek to review Pellegrino and Thomasma's analysis and to reintegrate the technical and ethical aspects of clinical reasoning.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine
Published
2025-08-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhaf029
Primary Topic
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Pellegrino and Thomasma’s Anatomy of Clinical Judgments Revisited

Michael Trimble, Pat Croskerry
The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
article

Pellegrino and Thomasma’s Anatomy of Clinical Judgments Revisited

Michael Trimble, Pat Croskerry
article en

Abstract

In 1981, Edmund Pellegrino and David Thomasma published A Philosophical Basis of Medical Practice. In this work, they situated the process of clinical judgment in the clinical encounter between an individual doctor and their patient. The encounter revolves around three questions: What can be wrong? What can be done? And what should be done for this patient? They analyzed the complete process of clinical reasoning involving both technical and ethical aspects. Pellegrino and Thomasma's subsequent work focused more on professionalism and ethics, while more recent analysis of clinical decision-making has been in the realm of psychology rather than along philosophical lines, particularly in the use of dual-process theory. Here we seek to review Pellegrino and Thomasma's analysis and to reintegrate the technical and ethical aspects of clinical reasoning.

The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of MedicineVol. 51(1)
Queen's University Belfast (GB), Dalhousie University (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 69%
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
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.