Am J Epidemiol. 2021 Jun 1;190(6):980-983. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwaa272.
Matching epidemiology's aspirations to actual delivery of goods valuable for population health depends both on the scientific and operational capabilities of epidemiology and on the degree to which the goods meet its contract with society. Epidemiology's capabilities have advanced remarkably in recent decades, although research gaps have appeared during the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Epidemiology's social contract reflecting a dual commitment to science and health could arguably be entirely met by producing research results under conditions variously described as objective, impartial, neutral, or independent and handing such results to decision makers and the public at large. However, a closer examination shows that those four terms address sharply distinct issues, with distinct practical implications, and that the epidemiologist responsibility is de facto involved beyond providing research results. Hence the epidemiologist's engagement should encompass arguing from a science-for-health viewpoint and proactively driving the results into decision processes on public health issues.
匹配流行病学的愿望与为人群健康提供有价值的实际成果，既取决于流行病学的科学和运营能力，也取决于这些成果在多大程度上符合其与社会的契约。尽管在当前的 2019 年冠状病毒病（COVID-19）大流行期间出现了一些研究空白，但在最近几十年，流行病学的能力已经显著提高。反映对科学和健康的双重承诺的流行病学的社会契约，可以说是通过在各种被描述为客观、公正、中立或独立的条件下进行研究并将这些结果提供给决策者和广大公众来完全实现的。然而，更仔细的检查表明，这四个术语涉及截然不同的问题，具有不同的实际影响，而且流行病学家的责任实际上超出了提供研究结果。因此，流行病学家的参与应该包括从健康科学的角度进行论证，并积极推动研究成果进入公共卫生问题的决策过程。
