为何振兴临床研究如此重要，却又如此困难？
Why is revitalizing clinical research so important, yet so difficult?
作者信息
Schechter Alan N, Perlman Robert L, Rettig Richard A
机构信息
Laboratory of Chemical Biology, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892-1822, USA.
出版信息
Perspect Biol Med. 2004 Autumn;47(4):476-86. doi: 10.1353/pbm.2004.0070.
We believe that support for academic clinical research has greatly declined in recent decades. Here we discuss our views on why this has happened. We define clinical or patient-oriented research as limited to the study of human beings or populations of individuals, and argue that its eclipse in favor of basic and "translational" research is the result of inappropriate conceptual paradigms or "models" for medical advances. We believe that medical history shows that the "bench-to-bedside" model is inadequate to explain most recent progress and that clinical advances themselves often lead to new basic research. Discussion of alternate conceptual frameworks for biomedical research should help lead to changes in funding and organizational structures that might finally revitalize clinical research.
我们认为，近几十年来对学术性临床研究的支持大幅下降。在此，我们讨论我们对于这种情况发生原因的看法。我们将临床或面向患者的研究定义为仅限于对人类个体或群体的研究，并认为其被基础研究和“转化”研究所取代是医学进步的不恰当概念范式或“模式”导致的结果。我们认为医学史表明“从 bench 到 bedside”模式不足以解释最近的进展，而且临床进展本身往往会引发新的基础研究。对生物医学研究替代概念框架的讨论应有助于促使资金和组织结构发生变化，最终可能重振临床研究。
Zotero 插件