Three-legged stool analogy

 

Brodhead, Quigley, and Cox (2018) describe the three-legged stool analogy. In this analogy, “One leg represent the best available evidence, one leg represents clinical expertise, and the final leg represents client values, preferences, characteristics, and circumstances (p. 71).
Are any lengths of the stool longer than the others in your clinical practice?
That is, do you emphasize published evidence, professional expertise, or client values/preferences more than the other two?
If so, how might you ethically justify those decisions (think back to Chapter 1)?
If not, how might you ethically justify those decisions?

Sample Solution

regards to the osmosis of pieces into lumps. Mill operator recognizes pieces and lumps of data, the differentiation being that a piece is comprised of various pieces of data. It is fascinating regards to the osmosis of pieces into lumps. Mill operator recognizes pieces and lumps of data, the differentiation being that a piece is comprised of various pieces of data. It is fascinating to take note of that while there is a limited ability to recall lumps of data, how much pieces in every one of those lumps can change broadly (Miller, 1956). Anyway it’s anything but a straightforward instance of having the memorable option huge pieces right away, somewhat that as each piece turns out to be more natural, it very well may be acclimatized into a lump, which is then recollected itself. Recoding is the interaction by which individual pieces are ‘recoded’ and allocated to lumps. Consequently the ends that can be drawn from Miller’s unique work is that, while there is an acknowledged breaking point to the quantity of pi

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.