Holding the complex whole: Generalist philosophy, priorities and practice that facilitate whole-person care.

BACKGROUND: Generalist work is often complex, especially in the face of undifferentiated, uncertain, uncomfortable or unremitting presentations. This complexity can be exacerbated by difficult social circumstances and health system constraints, as well as by dissonance between patient and clinician conceptions of ideal care. OBJECTIVE: This article offers philosophical and practical encouragement to help general practitioners (GPs) 'be with' patients, care for their own needs and value their complex work. DISCUSSION: Caring for the whole person is challenging. When done well, this complex care may look simple. Alongside biomedical knowledge, generalists require sophisticated relational sensitivity and capacity to notice and attend to context, culture, meaning and subjective inner experience, including the person's strengths and deepest fears. Generalist philosophy, priorities and clinical skills are named in this paper as part of the ongoing effort to help GPs value, hone and protect the often-misunderstood complexity of their work.

The Craft of Generalism clinical skills and attitudes for whole person care.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Generalists manage a broad range of biomedical and biographical knowledge as part of each clinical encounter, often in multiple encounters over time. The sophistication of this broad integrative work is often misunderstood by those schooled in reductionist or constructivist approaches to evidence. There is a need to describe the practical and philosophically robust ways that understanding about the whole person is formed. In this paper we describe first principles of generalist approaches to knowledge formation in clinical practice. We name the Craft of Generalism. METHODS: The newly described methodology of Transdisciplinary Generalism is examined by skilled generalist clinicians and translated into skills and attitudes useful for everyday generalist person-centred practice and research. RESULTS: The Craft of Generalism defines the required scope, process, priorities, and knowledge management skills of all generalists seeking to care for the whole person. These principles are Whole Person Scope, Relational Process, Healing Orientation, and Integrative Wisdom. These skills and attitudes are required for whole person care. If any element of these first principles is left out, the resultant knowledge is incomplete and philosophically incoherent. CONCLUSIONS: Naming the Craft of Generalism defines the generalist gaze and protects generalism from the colonization of a narrowed medical gaze that excludes all but reductionist evidence or constructivist experience. Defining the Craft of Generalism enables clear teaching of the sophisticated skills and attitudes of the generalist clinician. These philosophically robust principles encourage and defend the use of generalist approaches to knowledge in settings across the community - including health policy, education, and research.

Transdisciplinary Generalism: Naming the epistemology and philosophy of the generalist.

BACKGROUND: Transdisciplinary research and generalist practice both face the task of integrating and discerning the value of knowledge across disciplinary and sectoral knowledge cultures. Transdisciplinarity and generalism also both offer philosophical and practical insights into the epistemology, ontology, axiology, and logic of seeing the 'whole'. Although generalism is a skill that can be used in many settings from industry to education, the focus of this paper is the literature of the primary care setting (i.e., general practice or family medicine). Generalist philosophy and practice in the family medicine setting highly values whole person care that uses integrative and interpretive wisdom to include both biomedical and biographical forms of knowledge. Generalist researchers are often caught between reductionist (positivist) biomedical measures and social science (post-positivist) constructivist theories of knowing. Neither of these approaches, even when juxtaposed in mixed-methods research, approximate the complexity of the generalist clinical encounter. A theoretically robust research methodology is needed that acknowledges the complexity of interpreting these ways of knowing in research and clinical practice. METHODS: A conceptual review of literature to define the alignment between (a) the philosophy and practice of generalism in primary care and (b) both the practical (Zurich) and philosophical or methodological (Nicolescuian) schools of transdisciplinarity. RESULTS: The alignment between generalism and transdisciplinarity included their broad scope, relational process, complex knowledge management, humble attitude to knowing, and real-world outcome focus. CONCLUSION: The concurrence between these approaches to knowing is offered here as Transdisciplinary Generalism - a coherent epistemology for both primary care researchers and generalist clinicians to understand, enact, and research their own sophisticated craft of managing diverse forms of knowledge.

Beyond symptoms: defining primary care mental health clinical assessment priorities, content and process.

The assessment of undifferentiated psychological distress is a daily aspect of primary care practice. Primary care practitioners' underlying values influence the priorities, process and content of assessment. Currently there is a lack of definition of these values in primary care clinical mental health assessment. This paper presents the case for adopting the philosophical values and principles of holistic transdisciplinary generalism to influence practice worldwide. Furthermore, it raises awareness of current constraints on practice, including an overreliance on the psychiatric paradigm of care and resulting criteria-based diagnoses. Finally, the paper seeks to promote discussion among primary care practitioners and researchers globally about how to define primary care clinical mental health assessment priorities, process and content.