The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Recognizing rhetoric in health care policy analysis
Abstract
Critiques of the ‘naïve rationalist’ model of policy-making abound in the sociological and political science literature. Yet academic debate on health care policy-making continues to be couched in the dominant discourse of evidence-based medicine, whose underlying assumptions - that policies are driven by facts rather than values and these can be clearly separated; that ‘evidence’ is context-free, can be objectively weighed up and placed unproblematically in a ‘hierarchy’; and that policy-making is essentially an exercise in decision science - have constrained both thinking and practice. In this paper, drawing on theoretical work from political science and philosophy, and innovative empirical work in the health care sector, we argue that health care is well overdue for a re-defining of what policy-making is . Policy-making is the formal struggle over ideas and values, played out by the rhetorical use of language and the enactment of social situations. While the selection, evaluation and implementation of research evidence are important in the policy-making process, they do not equate to that process. The study of argument in the construction of policy has the potential to illuminate dimensions of the process that are systematically occluded when policy-making is studied through a naïve rationalist lens. In particular, a rhetorical perspective highlights the struggle over ideas, the ‘naming and framing’ of policy problems, the centrality of audience and the rhetorical use of language in discussion to increase the audience's adherence to particular framings and proposals. Rhetorical theory requires us to redefine what counts as ‘rationality’ - which must extend from what is provably true (by logic) and probably true (by Bayesian reasoning) to embrace, in addition, that which is plausibly true (i.e. can convince a reasonable audience). Future research into health care policy-making needs to move beyond the study of ‘getting evidence into practice’ and address the language, arguments and discourse through which policy is constructed and enacted.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Dopson, S., & Fitzgerald, L. (2005) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199259014.001.0001 · Cited by 161
Cited by
Early intervention in psychosis: concepts, evidence and future directions
MCGORRY, P. D., KILLACKEY, E., & YUNG, A. (2008) · World Psychiatry · doi:10.1002/j.2051-5545.2008.tb00182.x · Cited by 581
Systems science and systems thinking for public health: a systematic review of the field
Carey, G., Malbon, E., Carey, N., Joyce, A., Crammond, B., & Carey, A. (2015) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009002 · Cited by 432
How Do You Modernize a Health Service? A Realist Evaluation of Whole‐Scale Transformation in London
GREENHALGH, T., HUMPHREY, C., HUGHES, J., MACFARLANE, F., BUTLER, C., & PAWSON, R. (2009) · The Milbank Quarterly · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00562.x · Cited by 380
Self-citationParkhurst, J. (2016) · London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) · doi:10.4324/9781315675008 · Cited by 756
KATIKIREDDI, S. V., BOND, L., & HILTON, S. (2014) · The Milbank Quarterly · doi:10.1111/1468-0009.12057 · Cited by 95
“97 The availability of different sources of epidemiological data and the choice of different time periods over which to illustrate trends helped policy actors present the policy issue in markedly different ways—as either a crisis requiring urgent action or a problem that was being resolved.”
Metadata
- Authors
- Russell, J., Greenhalgh, T., Byrne, E., & Mcdonnell, J.
- Venue
- Journal of Health Services Research & Policy
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-01
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 40-46
- ISSN
- 1355-8196 (ISSN-L)
- 1758-1060
- OpenAlex
- W2061787399
- Cited by
- 164
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 86.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Recognizing rhetoric in health care policy analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1258/jhsrp.2007.006029
- The paper
- Russell, J., Greenhalgh, T., Byrne, E., & Mcdonnell, J. (2008). Recognizing rhetoric in health care policy analysis. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy. https://doi.org/10.1258/jhsrp.2007.006029
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.