Dealing with uncertainty: the argumentative potential of doubt in medical consultations

In this paper, we explore a particular normative dimension of the strategies used by healthcare professionals to manage uncertainty in medical consultations. We analyze medical consultations focusing on the argumentative potential of doubts expressed by patients and their families by examining the inferences activated beyond what is explicitly stated in the sequences exhibiting doubt. Using the distinction between three argumentative potentials of doubt (ambivalent doubt, skeptic doubt, and denialism), we run an exploratory analysis on an Italian corpus of 52 medical consultations between health professionals and patients with Type 2 diabetes. Based on the analysis, we argue that when expressed in medical consultations, skeptical doubts should be explicitly acknowledged and adequately addressed to prevent the doubt from acquiring a denialist potential, which can undermine patient adherence and the possibility of favorable health outcomes.