Choi Bernard C K, Pak Anita W P
Centre for Chronic Disease Prevention and Control, Public Health Agency of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario.
Clin Invest Med. 2006 Dec;29(6):351-64.
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Teamwork involving multiple disciplines is increasingly emphasized in health research, services, education and policy. The terms multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary are increasingly used in the literature, but are ambiguously defined and interchangeably used. This paper is the first of two in a series. It discusses the definitions, objectives, and evidence of effectiveness of such teamwork.
The paper is a literature review based on dictionaries, and Google and MEDLINE (1982-2006) searches.
Multidisciplinarity draws on knowledge from different disciplines but stays within their boundaries. Interdisciplinarity analyzes, synthesizes and harmonizes links between disciplines into a coordinated and coherent whole. Transdisciplinarity integrates the natural, social and health sciences in a humanities context, and transcends their traditional boundaries. The objectives of multiple disciplinary approaches are to resolve real world or complex problems, to provide different perspectives on problems, to create comprehensive research questions, to develop concensus clinical definitions and guidelines, and to provide comprehensive health services. Multiple disciplinary teamwork has both benefits and drawbacks.
The three terms refer to the involvement of multiple disciplines to varying degrees on the same continuum. The common words for multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary are additive, interactive, and holistic, respectively. With their own specific meanings, these terms should not be used interchangeably. The more general term "multiple disciplinary" is suggested for when the nature of involvement of multiple disciplines is unknown or unspecified. While multiple disciplinary teamwork is appropriate for complex problems, it is not always necessary in every single project.
背景/目的：在健康研究、服务、教育及政策领域，多学科协作正日益受到重视。多学科、跨学科和超学科这些术语在文献中越来越多地被使用，但定义模糊且常被互换使用。本文是系列文章中的第一篇，讨论此类协作的定义、目标及有效性证据。
本文是基于词典以及谷歌和医学文献数据库（1982 - 2006年）检索结果的文献综述。
多学科利用不同学科的知识，但局限于各学科边界之内。跨学科分析、整合并协调各学科之间的联系，形成一个协调一致的整体。超学科在人文背景下整合自然科学、社会科学和健康科学，并超越其传统边界。多学科方法的目标是解决现实世界或复杂问题、提供对问题的不同视角、提出全面的研究问题、制定共识性临床定义和指南以及提供全面的健康服务。多学科协作既有优点也有缺点。
这三个术语指在同一连续体上多学科参与的程度不同。多学科、跨学科和超学科的共同特征分别是累加性、交互性和整体性。这些术语有其特定含义，不应互换使用。当多学科参与的性质未知或未明确说明时，建议使用更通用的术语“多学科”。虽然多学科协作适用于复杂问题，但并非在每个项目中都总是必要的。
