Abstract

In this article we present a published case study as an object of reflection. On this basis, we carried out a partial reconstruction of the process of study and diagnostic elaboration of the Uruguay syndrome, showing the circumstances of the case, the selection and interpretation of "clues," and some of the details relevant to the clinical reasoning. Our starting point is the recognition of the narrative nature of clinical knowledge and of the clinical method as an indiciary method. The manuscript of the Uruguay syndrome has a narrative structure adjusted to the conventions of a scientific article, which gives lesser importance to the clinical method. We carried out diverse methodical encounters, mainly involving in-depth interviews with the authors of the manuscript and observation in their workplace. The text seeks to recover the histories of work based on the indiciary or semiotic model of knowledge, and recognize the importance of this model in medical practice.