Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, Keenan Research Centre of St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
J Urban Health. 2012 Dec;89(6):875-80. doi: 10.1007/s11524-012-9693-7.
In 2011, an interdisciplinary symposium was organized in Toronto, Canada to investigate prevailing models of health policy change in the knowledge translation literature and to assess the applicability of these models for equity-focused urban health research. The papers resulting from the symposium have been published together, in the Journal of Urban Health, along with this introductory essay. This essay describes how the different papers grapple in different ways with how to understand and to bridge the gaps between urban health research and action. The breadth of perspectives reflected in the papers (e.g., social epidemiology, public health, political science, sociology, critical labor studies, and educational psychology) shed much light on core tensions in the relationship between KT and health equity. The first tension is whether the content of evidence or the context of decision making is the strong determinate of research impact in relation to health equity policy. The second tension is whether relationships between health equity researchers and decision makers are best viewed in terms of collaboration or of conflict. The third concerns the role that power plays in evidence-based policy making, when the issues at stake are not only empirical but also normative.
2011 年，在加拿大多伦多组织了一次跨学科研讨会，旨在调查知识转化文献中流行的健康政策变革模型，并评估这些模型对以公平为重点的城市健康研究的适用性。研讨会的论文已在《城市健康杂志》上一并发表，本文是对这些论文的介绍。本文描述了不同的论文如何以不同的方式理解和弥合城市健康研究与行动之间的差距。这些论文所反映的观点（例如社会流行病学、公共卫生、政治学、社会学、批判劳动研究和教育心理学）广泛涉及知识转化与健康公平之间关系的核心紧张关系。第一个紧张关系是，在与健康公平政策相关的研究影响方面，是证据的内容还是决策的背景是强有力的决定因素。第二个紧张关系是，在健康公平研究人员和决策者之间的关系方面，是合作还是冲突的观点更好。第三个问题涉及到权力在基于证据的政策制定中的作用，当涉及的问题不仅是经验性的，而且是规范性的。
