Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland 21202, USA.
Dev World Bioeth. 2012 Dec;12(3):157-63. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8847.2012.00333.x. Epub 2012 Jun 20.
This article describes the types of community-wide benefits provided by investigators conducting public health research in South Asia as well as their self-reported reasons for providing such benefits.
We conducted 52 in-depth interviews to explore how public health investigators in low-resource settings make decisions about the delivery of ancillary care to research subjects. In 39 of the interviews respondents described providing benefits to members of the community in which they conducted their study. We returned to our narrative dataset to find answers to two questions: What types of community-wide benefits do researchers provide when conducting public health intervention studies in the community setting, and what reasons do researchers give when asked why they provided community-wide benefits?
The types of community-wide benefits delivered were directed to the health and well-being of the population. The most common types of benefits delivered were the facilitation of access to health care for individuals in acute medical need and emergency response to natural disasters. Respondents' self-reported reasons when asked why they provided such benefits fell into 2 general categories: intrinsic importance and instrumental importance.
本文描述了南亚进行公共卫生研究的调查人员提供的社区福利类型，以及他们自我报告提供此类福利的原因。
我们进行了 52 次深入访谈，以探讨资源匮乏环境下的公共卫生调查人员如何就向研究对象提供辅助医疗做出决策。在 39 次访谈中，受访者描述了为其研究所在社区的成员提供福利。我们从我们的叙述性数据集返回，以回答两个问题：当在社区环境中进行公共卫生干预研究时，研究人员提供哪些类型的社区福利，以及当被问及他们为何提供社区福利时，研究人员给出了哪些理由？
提供的社区福利类型旨在促进人群的健康和福祉。最常见的福利类型是为有紧急医疗需求的个人提供医疗保健服务，以及对自然灾害的紧急响应。当被问及为何提供此类福利时，受访者自我报告的原因分为两类：内在重要性和工具性重要性。
