Morehouse College.
Morehouse School of Medicine.
Am J Bioeth. 2020 May;20(4):100-101. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2020.1730498.
Health disparities-reduction research and implementation efforts are based on high ethical ideals. Given the cultural milieu in which research often occurs: How do we make these ideals happen? How do we bring about justice and fairness in health? Sisk and colleagues propose “implementation science” as a key to making an “is” from an “ought.” They suggest that bioethical and bioethics-motived research be collaborative and interdisciplinary, including both researchers of many types and the communities and individuals motivating the research activities who will most benefit from that research and outreach. We agree. However, we argue that Sisk and colleagues underemphasize the many cultural and cross-cultural factors in bringing research efforts to fruition, especially when researchers and research subjects inhabit somewhat different cultures. We illustrate this and offer guidelines for implementation based on known best practices for engaging and addressing racial health disparities in the US.
健康差异——减少研究和实施工作基于崇高的道德理想。鉴于研究经常发生的文化环境：我们如何实现这些理想？我们如何实现健康领域的公正和公平？Sisk 及其同事提出“实施科学”作为将“应然”变为“实然”的关键。他们建议，以生物伦理和受生物伦理驱动的研究应该是协作和跨学科的，包括各种类型的研究人员以及最能从研究和推广活动中受益的社区和个人。我们同意这一观点。然而，我们认为 Sisk 及其同事在将研究工作付诸实践时，对许多文化和跨文化因素重视不够，尤其是当研究人员和研究对象所处的文化存在一定差异时。我们举例说明了这一点，并根据美国在解决和处理种族健康差异方面的最佳实践提供了实施指南。
