English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Both general practice and homeopathic consultations  are organized around the key task of treating patients’ health-related problems.  Despite their different theories of healing, interactions between professionals  and patients in both share many features, though there are also clear  differences in the ways in which patients and professionals go about the process  of problem solving. This paper compares the ways in which a specific activity,  the delivery and reception of the reason for the visit, is managed in these two  institutional environments. Through the comparison, it discusses ways in which  participants are informed by the different theories of healing and ‘ideal’  models of interaction in their activities at the consultation, and points at  some discrepancies between theories on treatment and theories on interaction.  Furthermore, the paper shows how other contextual features, such as the  institutionalized structure of a service encounter, may be consequential for the  interaction analyzed. Finally, the paper discusses the potential benefits of  this analysis to the practices studied.

Comparing homeopathic and general practice consultations: The case of problem presentation