首页> 外文期刊>Preventive Medicine: An International Journal Devoted to Practice and Theory >Can health equity survive epidemiology? Standards of proof and social determinants of health
【24h】

Can health equity survive epidemiology? Standards of proof and social determinants of health

机译:健康股权可以生存流行病学吗? 健康的证据和社会决定因素标准

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Objective: This article examines how epidemiological evidence is and should be used in the context of increasing concern for health equity and for social determinants of health. Method: A research literature on use of scientific evidence of "environmental risks" is outlined, and key issues compared with those that arise with respect to social determinants of health. Results: The issue sets are very similar. Both involve the choice of a standard of proof, and the corollary need to make value judgments about how to address uncertainty in the context of "the inevitability of being wrong," at least some of the time, and to consider evidence from multiple kinds of research design. The nature of such value judgments and the need for methodological pluralism are incompletely understood. Conclusion: Responsible policy analysis and interpretation of scientific evidence require explicit consideration of the ethical issues involved in choosing a standard of proof. Because of the stakes involved, such choices often become contested political terrain. Comparative research on how those choices are made will be valuable.
机译:目的:本文探讨了流行病学证据如何,应该如何在越来越多的健康权益和健康的社会决定因素的背景下使用。方法:概述了关于“环境风险”的科学证据的研究文献,以及与健康社会决定因素产生的关键问题。结果:问题集非常相似。两者都涉及选择标准的证据,这是关于如何应对如何解决“不可避免的错误”的不确定性的价值判断,至少一些时间,并考虑来自多种类型的证据研究设计。这种价值判断的性质和方法论多元化的需求是不完全理解的。结论:负责任的政策分析和对科学证据的解释需要明确审议选择证据标准的道德问题。由于所涉及的赌注,这种选择经常成为有争议的政治地形。对那些选择的比较研究是有价值的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号