EBP and Personal Ombudsman
Formalizations and objectivities
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3384/SVT.2021.28.1.4076Abstract
Evidence-based practice (EBP) has long been the subject of a polarized debate in social work. The most pronounced disagreements concern how science is viewed in EBP. In the debate, this is accentuated by EBP being associated with a narrow methodological focus. At the same time, EBP has in practice been reinterpreted to the extent that it risks becoming a label without content. Neither narrow methodological focus nor non-committal applications are likely to be optimal for generating improvements in social care or for taking advantage of reflections made within the social services that can be valuable in relation to revisions of EBP. This study therefore aims to introduce partially new concepts and highlight their implications for the development of new attitudes and approaches. This is done by analysing the relationship between EBP and a social services practice (Personal Ombudsman) which exemplifies the complexity considered typical of social work. A further purpose is to reflect on which elements of EBP need to be revised or preserved in order for EBP to be a desirable project in that type of practice. The empirical material is based on interviews in a Personal Ombudsman unit and it is analysed within the framework of science and technology studies. The results show that the type of cognitive formalization applied, and the type of mechanical objectivity aimed for in EBP can be problematic in the Personal Ombudsman practice. At the same time, formalizations in themselves are not problematic because, despite the initial impression of complexity, the studied practice is more formalized than first assumed. However, the most important formalizations in the studied practice are not cognitive but social and the analysis indicates that structured incorporation of such social formalizations in order to strengthen disciplinary objectivity could potentially be of great value as a supplement to current models of EBP.
References
Bergmark, A. & Lundström, T. (2011) Evidensbaserad praktik i svenskt socialt arbete. Om ett programs mottagande, förändring och möjligheter i en ny omgivning. I: I. Bohlin & M. Sager (red.)
Evidensens många ansikten. Evidensbaserad praktik i praktiken. Lund: Arkiv förlag.
Broström, L. (2019) Vad göra när vi önskar att vi visste mer? En etisk fråga för socialtjänst och forskning. I: Vetenskap och beprövad erfarenhet. Socialtjänst. Lund: VBE.
Collins, H. M. (1981) Stages in the Empirical Programme of Relativism. Social Studies of Science. 11:3-10.
Collins, H. M. (2010) Tacit and explicit knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Daston, L. (1992) Objectivity and the escape from perspective. Social Studies of Science, 22(4):597–618.
Daston, L. & Galison, P. (2007) Objectivity. New York: Zone Books.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2011) Case study. I: K. D. Norman & Y. S. Lincoln (red) The Sage handbook of qualitative research. (4 uppl.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
FORTE (2019) Prioriteringar fo?r forskning om socialtja?nsten. Perspektiv fra?n brukare, policy och praktik. Stockholm: FORTE.
Gray, M., Plath, D. & Webb, S. A. (2009) Evidence-based social work. A critical stance. New York: Routledge.
Guyatt, G., Cairns, J., Churchill, D. et al. (1992) Evidence-based medicine. A new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA, 268(17): 2420–2425.
Hammersley, M. (2005) Is the evidence-based practice movement doing more good than harm?
Reflections on Iain Chalmers’ case for research-based policy making and practice. The Policy Press, 1(1): 85–100.
Hammersley, M. & Atkinson, P. (2007) Ethnography. (3 uppl.). London: Routledge.
Haynes, R. B., Devereaux, P. J. & Guyatt, G. H. (2002) Clinical expertise in the era of evidencebased medicine and patient choice. Evidence-Based Medicine, 7: 36–38.
Knaapen, L. (2014) Evidence-based medicine or cookbook medicine? Addressing concerns over standardization of care. Sociology Compass, 8(6): 823–836.
Kunskapsguiden (2019) Fem grundsteg. Kunskapsguiden. [https://kunskapsguiden.se/omraden-ochteman/verksamhetsutveckling/evidensbaserad-praktik/fem-grundsteg/. Hämtat 2020-11-10].
Law, J. (2017) STS as method. I: U. Felt, R. Fouché, C. A. Miller & L. Smith-Doerr (red.), The handbook of science and technology studies. London: The MIT Press.
Lundström, T. & Shanks, E. (2013) Hård yta men mjukt innanmäte. Om hur chefer inom den sociala barnavården översätter evidensbaserat socialt arbete till lokal praktik. Socialvetenskaplig tidskrift, (2): 108–126.
Martinell Barfoed, E. (2014) Standardiserad interaktion. En utmaning för socialt arbete. Socialvetenskaplig tidskrift, (1): 4–23.
Megill, A. (1994) Introduction. Four senses of objectivity. I: A. Megill (red.) Rethinking objectivity. Durham: Duke University Press.
Oscarsson, L. (2009) Evidensbaserad praktik inom socialtjänsten. Stockholm: Sveriges Kommuner och Landsting.
Petersén, A. C. & Olsson J. I. (2015) Calling evidence-based practice into question. Acknowledging phronetic knowledge in social work. British Journal of Social Work, 45: 1581–1597.
Porter, T. M. (1995) Trust in numbers. The pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Sackett, D. L., Rosenberg, W. M. C., Gray, J. A. M., Haynes, R. B., & Richardsson, W. S. (1996) Evidence-based medicine. What it is and what it isn’t. British Medical Journal, 312(7023): 71–2.
Sager, M. & Bohlin, I. (2011) Avslutning. I: I. Bohlin & M. Sager (red.) Evidensens många ansikten. Evidensbaserad praktik i praktiken. Lund: Arkiv förlag.
Sager, M. & Pistone, I. (2019) Kunskap. I: A. Krohwinkel & U. Mannerheim (red.) LHC report. Nr 3. Moderna policyer. Inspel för en framtidsinriktad hälso- och sjukvårdsdebatt (s. 80–107). Stockholm Leading Health Care.
Silverman, D. (1985) Qualitative methodology & sociology. Aldershot: Gower Publishing Company Limited.
Socialstyrelsen (2003) Mål & metoder. Att arbeta som personligt ombud. Stockholm: Socialstyrelsen.
Socialstyrelsen (2009) Ett nytt yrke tar form. Personligt ombud, PO. Stockholm: Socialstyrelsen.
Socialstyrelsen (2011) Meddelandeblad nr 5. Statsbidrag till kommuner som inrättat verksamhet med personligt ombud till vissa personer med psykisk funktionsnedsättning. Stockholm: Socialstyrelsen.
Socialstyrelsen (2019) Att arbeta evidensbaserat. Socialstyrelsen. [https://www.socialstyrelsen.se/utveckla verksamhet/evidensbaserad-praktik/arbeta-evidensbaserat/. Hämtat 2020-11-04].
Socialstyrelsen & Sveriges Kommuner och Landsting (2011) På väg mot en evidensbaserad praktik inom socialtjänsten. Kartläggning, analys och förslag för att förbättra kunskapsstyrningen. Stockholm: Socialstyrelsen.
Sundell, K. (2011) Från auktoritetsbaserat till evidensbaserat socialt arbete. Skandinavisk Sjukvårdsinformation, 5(7): 6.
Sundell, K., Vinnerljung, B., Jergeby, U., Varg, N., Marklund, K. & Anttila, S. (2007) Socialt arbete. Mellan evidens och praktik. Socionomen, (2): 63–65.
Sundqvist, G., Bohlin, I., Hermansen, E. A. T. & Yearley, S. (2015) Formalization and separation. A systemic basis for interpreting approaches to summarizing science for climate policy. Social Studies of Science, 45(3): 416–440.
Svanevie, K. (2011) Evidensbaserat socialt arbete. Från idé till praktik. Umeå: Print & Media.
Svedberg, E. (2009) Personliga ombud och etik. I: Egen kraft – egen makt. En antologi om arbetet som personligt ombud. Stockholm: Socialstyrelsen.
SFS 2013:522 Förordning om statsbidrag till kommuner som bedriver verksamhet med personligt ombud för vissa personer med psykiska funktionsnedsättningar. Stockholm: Socialdepartementet.
Timmermans, S. & Berg, M. (2003) The gold standard. The challenge of evidence-based medicine and standardization in health care. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Topor, A. (2009) Återhämtning och empowerment. I: Egen kraft – egen makt. En antologi om arbetet som personligt ombud. Stockholm, Socialstyrelsen.
Widell (Lidström-), G. (1995) Organisationsbilder. Om tanken som bas för handling. Göteborg: BAS.
Wieten, S. (2018) Expertise in evidence-based medicine. A tale of three models. Philosophy, Ethics and Humanities in Medicine, 13(2): 1–7.
Wittgenstein, L. (1967[1953]) Philosophical investigations (Trans. by G.E.M. Anscombe). (3 uppl.) Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Zuiderent-Jerak, T., Forland, F. & Macbeth, F. (2012) Guidelines should reflect all knowledge, not just clinical trials. BMJ, 345 (e6702).
