This review offers a nuanced framework of how different types of medical humanities work. The epistemological assumptions and discursive positioning of medical humanities teaching frame the forms of outcomes research that are considered relevant to curriculum decision making, and shed light on why dominant review methodologies make some functions of medical humanities teaching visible and render others invisible. We recommend the use of this framework to improve the rigor and relevance of future explorations of the efficacy and utility of medical humanities teaching.

This paper points to conceptual boundaries within which occupational identity is currently being shaped and points to alternative possibilities in the hope of prompting dialogue and research that looks at this concept in more diverse ways. Heightened sensitivity to the influence of culture on the shaping of occupation-focussed knowledge will serve to strengthen and enrich the growth of the evolving body of knowledge pertaining to occupation, and foster culturally sensitive research and practice.

No abstract

No abstract