• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

从科学哲学和“VALIDATE”项目中汲取的证据规范性的教训。

On the normativity of evidence - Lessons from philosophy of science and the "VALIDATE" project.

机构信息

Research Center for Clinical Bioethics and Medical Humanities, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.

出版信息

Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2023 Dec;27(23):11202-11210. doi: 10.26355/eurrev_202312_34560.

DOI:10.26355/eurrev_202312_34560
PMID:38095370
Abstract

"Evidence" is a key term in medicine and health services research, including Health Technology Assessment (HTA). Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have undoubtedly dominated the scene of generating evidence for a long period of time, becoming the hallmark of evidence-based medicine (EBM). However, due to a number of misunderstandings, the lay audience and some researchers have sometimes placed too much trust in RCTs compared to other methods of investigation. One of the principal misunderstandings is to consider RCTs findings as isolated and self-apparent pieces of information. In other words, what has been essentially lacking was the awareness of the value-context of the evidence and, in particular, the value- and theory-ladenness (normativity) of scientific knowledge. This paper aims to emphasize the normativity that exists in the production of scientific knowledge, and in particular in the conduct of RCTs as well as in the performance of HTA. The work is based on some lessons learned from Philosophy of Science and the European project "VALIDATE" (VALues In Doing Assessments of healthcare TEchnologies"). VALIDATE was a three-year EU Erasmus+ strategic partnerships project (2018-2021), in which training in the field of HTA was further optimized by using insights from political science and ethics (in accordance with the recent definition of HTA). Our analysis may reveal useful insights for addressing some challenges that HTA is going to face in the future.

摘要

“证据”是医学和卫生服务研究中的一个关键术语,包括卫生技术评估(HTA)。随机临床试验(RCT)无疑在很长一段时间内主导了证据生成领域,成为循证医学(EBM)的标志。然而,由于一些误解,外行人有时会过分信任 RCT,而不是其他研究方法。其中一个主要的误解是将 RCT 的发现视为孤立的、自明的信息。换句话说,人们基本上没有意识到证据的价值背景,特别是科学知识的价值和理论内涵(规范性)。本文旨在强调科学知识生产中存在的规范性,特别是在 RCT 的进行以及 HTA 的实施中。这项工作基于从科学哲学和欧洲项目“VALIDATE”(评估医疗保健技术的价值观)中吸取的一些经验教训。VALIDATE 是一个为期三年的欧盟伊拉斯谟+战略伙伴关系项目(2018-2021 年),通过利用政治学和伦理学的见解(根据 HTA 的最新定义)进一步优化了 HTA 领域的培训。我们的分析可能会为解决 HTA 在未来面临的一些挑战提供有用的见解。

相似文献

1
On the normativity of evidence - Lessons from philosophy of science and the "VALIDATE" project.从科学哲学和“VALIDATE”项目中汲取的证据规范性的教训。
Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2023 Dec;27(23):11202-11210. doi: 10.26355/eurrev_202312_34560.
2
Evaluating facts and facting evaluations: On the fact-value relationship in HTA.评估事实与进行评价:论卫生技术评估中的事实-价值关系
J Eval Clin Pract. 2018 Oct;24(5):957-965. doi: 10.1111/jep.12920. Epub 2018 Apr 3.
3
Integrating Empirical Analysis and Normative Inquiry in Health Technology Assessment: The Values in Doing Assessments of Health Technologies Approach.将实证分析与规范探究整合于卫生技术评估:卫生技术评估方法中的评估价值观
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2022 Jun 23;38(1):e52. doi: 10.1017/S0266462321001768.
4
Health technology assessment of medical devices: What is different? An overview of three European projects.医疗设备的卫生技术评估:有何不同?三个欧洲项目概述。
Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2015;109(4-5):309-18. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2015.06.011. Epub 2015 Jul 26.
5
Diffusion and use of health technology assessment in policy making: what lessons for decentralised healthcare systems?卫生技术评估在政策制定中的传播和应用:对分散的医疗保健系统有哪些借鉴意义?
Health Policy. 2012 Dec;108(2-3):194-202. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2012.09.017. Epub 2012 Oct 23.
6
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
7
HTA Training for Healthcare Professionals: International Overview of Initiatives Provided by HTA Agencies and Organizations.医疗保健专业人员 HTA 培训:HTA 机构和组织提供的国际计划概述。
Front Public Health. 2022 Feb 10;10:795763. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.795763. eCollection 2022.
8
[Is evidence-based medicine killing psychiatry softly? A critical review of "evidence-based psychiatry" from an epistemological and ethical perspective].[循证医学是否正在悄然扼杀精神病学?从认识论和伦理学角度对“循证精神病学”的批判性综述]
Sante Ment Que. 2019 Fall;44(2):145-161.
9
Models and applications for measuring the impact of health research: update of a systematic review for the Health Technology Assessment programme.衡量卫生研究影响的模型与应用:卫生技术评估项目系统评价的更新
Health Technol Assess. 2016 Oct;20(76):1-254. doi: 10.3310/hta20760.
10
International comparison of comparative effectiveness research in five jurisdictions: insights for the US.五个司法管辖区的比较有效性研究的国际比较:对美国的启示。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(10):813-30. doi: 10.2165/11536150-000000000-00000.

引用本文的文献

1
Ethical challenges for Health Technology Assessment (HTA) in the evolving evidence landscape.不断变化的证据格局下,卫生技术评估(HTA)面临的伦理挑战。
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2024 Nov 4;40(1):e39. doi: 10.1017/S0266462324000394.