跨学科人群健康研究中的假设、模糊性与可能性。
Assumptions, ambiguities, and possibilities in interdisciplinary population health research.
作者信息
Whitfield Kyle, Reid Colleen
机构信息
School of Planning, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON.
出版信息
Can J Public Health. 2004 Nov-Dec;95(6):434-6. doi: 10.1007/BF03403988.
The rhetoric of "interdisciplinary," "multi-disciplinary," and "transdisciplinary" permeates many population health research projects, funding proposals, and strategic initiatives. Working across, with, and between disciplines is touted as a way to advance knowledge, answer more complex questions, and work more meaningfully with users of research. From our own experiences and involvement in the 2003 CIHR Institute for Public and Population Health's Summer Institute, interdisciplinary population health research (IPHR) remains ambiguously defined and poorly understood. In this commentary, we critically explore some characteristics and ongoing assumptions associated with IPHR and propose questions to ensure a more deliberate research process. It is our hope that population health researchers and the CIHR will consider these questions to help strengthen IPHR.
“跨学科”“多学科”和“超学科”等术语充斥于众多人群健康研究项目、资助申请和战略计划之中。跨学科、与不同学科合作以及在学科之间开展合作，被视为推动知识进步、解答更复杂问题以及与研究使用者进行更有意义合作的途径。基于我们自身参与2003年加拿大卫生研究院公共与人群健康研究所暑期学院的经历，跨学科人群健康研究（IPHR）的定义依然模糊不清，人们对其理解也较为有限。在这篇评论文章中，我们批判性地探讨了与IPHR相关的一些特征和现存假设，并提出了一些问题，以确保研究过程更加审慎。我们希望人群健康研究人员以及加拿大卫生研究院能够考虑这些问题，以助力加强IPHR。
Zotero 插件