• 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

相似文献

1
Teaching scientific evidence and critical thinking for policy making.为政策制定传授科学证据和批判性思维。
Biol Methods Protoc. 2024 Apr 11;9(1):bpae023. doi: 10.1093/biomethods/bpae023. eCollection 2024.
2
New trends in science communication fostering evidence-informed policymaking.促进基于证据的决策制定的科学传播新趋势。
Open Res Eur. 2023 Oct 24;2:78. doi: 10.12688/openreseurope.14769.2. eCollection 2022.
3
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.
4
A conceptual framework for understanding the perspectives on the causes of the science-practice gap in ecology and conservation.理解生态学和保护学中科学实践差距成因观点的概念框架。
Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2018 May;93(2):1032-1055. doi: 10.1111/brv.12385. Epub 2017 Nov 20.
5
Perspectives From the Science-Policy Interface in Animal Health and Welfare.动物健康与福利领域科学-政策界面的观点
Front Vet Sci. 2019 Nov 8;6:382. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2019.00382. eCollection 2019.
6
Scientists of Tomorrow/ Cientistas do Amanhã : a project to inspire, stimulate scientific thinking, and introduce scientific methodology for young students.明日科学家:一个激发、激发年轻学生科学思维并介绍科学方法的项目。
Einstein (Sao Paulo). 2023 Dec 22;21:eAE0622. doi: 10.31744/einstein_journal/2023AE0622. eCollection 2023.
7
Do evidence summaries increase health policy-makers' use of evidence from systematic reviews? A systematic review.证据总结能否增加卫生政策制定者对系统评价证据的使用?一项系统评价。
Campbell Syst Rev. 2018 Sep 10;14(1):1-52. doi: 10.4073/csr.2018.8. eCollection 2018.
8
Exploring conceptual and theoretical frameworks for nurse practitioner education: a scoping review protocol.探索执业护士教育的概念和理论框架:一项范围综述方案
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Oct;13(10):146-55. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-2150.
9
Engaging Early-Career Scientists in Global Policy-Making.让早期职业科学家参与全球决策。
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2023 Aug 21;62(34):e202217841. doi: 10.1002/anie.202217841. Epub 2023 Jun 28.
10
Shared ways of thinking in Brazil about the science-practice interface in ecology and conservation.巴西在生态学和保护学的科学-实践界面上的共同思维方式。
Conserv Biol. 2020 Apr;34(2):449-461. doi: 10.1111/cobi.13242. Epub 2018 Nov 20.

本文引用的文献

1
Identifying the impact of social influences in health-related discrete choice experiments.识别健康相关离散选择实验中社会影响的影响。
PLoS One. 2022 Oct 19;17(10):e0276141. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0276141. eCollection 2022.
2
Science beliefs, political ideology, and cognitive sophistication.科学信念、政治意识形态与认知成熟度。
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2023 Jan;152(1):80-97. doi: 10.1037/xge0001267. Epub 2022 Aug 4.
3
What Works to Increase Vaccination Uptake.提高疫苗接种率的有效措施。
Acad Pediatr. 2021 May-Jun;21(4S):S9-S16. doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2021.01.017.
4
Who is susceptible to online health misinformation? A test of four psychosocial hypotheses.谁容易受到网络健康谣言的影响?对四个心理社会假设的检验。
Health Psychol. 2021 Apr;40(4):274-284. doi: 10.1037/hea0000978. Epub 2021 Mar 1.
5
Chemophobia in Europe and reasons for biased risk perceptions.欧洲的化学恐惧症及风险认知偏差的原因。
Nat Chem. 2019 Dec;11(12):1071-1072. doi: 10.1038/s41557-019-0377-8.
6
Effective strategies for rebutting science denialism in public discussions.有效策略反驳公众讨论中的科学否定论。
Nat Hum Behav. 2019 Sep;3(9):931-939. doi: 10.1038/s41562-019-0632-4. Epub 2019 Jun 24.
7
Extreme opponents of genetically modified foods know the least but think they know the most.极端反对转基因食品的人所知最少,但自认为最了解。
Nat Hum Behav. 2019 Mar;3(3):251-256. doi: 10.1038/s41562-018-0520-3. Epub 2019 Jan 14.
8
Hauntings, homeopathy, and the Hopkinsville Goblins: using pseudoscience to teach scientific thinking. hauntings, 顺势疗法, 和霍普金斯维尔 Goblins: 使用伪科学来教授科学思维。
Front Psychol. 2014 Apr 17;5:336. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00336. eCollection 2014.
9
Policy: The art of science advice to government.政策:向政府提供科学建议的艺术。
Nature. 2014 Mar 13;507(7491):163-5. doi: 10.1038/507163a.
10
Science policy: Beyond the great and good.科学政策:超越杰出与优秀。
Nature. 2012 May 16;485(7398):301-2. doi: 10.1038/485301a.

为政策制定传授科学证据和批判性思维。

Teaching scientific evidence and critical thinking for policy making.

作者信息

Pasternak Taschner Natalia, Almeida Paulo

机构信息

Center for Science and Society, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States.

Instituto Questão de Ciência, São Paulo, Brazil.

出版信息

Biol Methods Protoc. 2024 Apr 11;9(1):bpae023. doi: 10.1093/biomethods/bpae023. eCollection 2024.

DOI:10.1093/biomethods/bpae023
PMID:38680164
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11052655/
Abstract

While there is worldwide tendency to promote the use of scientific evidence to inform policy making, little has been done to train scientists and policy makers for this interaction. If we want to bridge the gap between academia, scientific knowledge, and policy, we must begin by providing formal training and skill building for actors and stakeholders. Scientists are not trained to communicate and inform policy, and policy makers are not trained to understand scientific process and assess evidence. Building an environment where this collaboration can flourish depends on teaching competencies and abilities specific for decision-making processes. As professors of policy with a background in science, we have started teaching preliminary courses on the use of scientific evidence in policy making. Feedback from students and institutions has been positive, paving the way for similar courses in other schools and institutions and maybe even new career paths. This article is intended to share our experience in designing and teaching courses aimed at training policy makers. Moving forward we plan to include training for science majors, thus encompassing the two main sides of this dialogue and opening new career opportunities for scientists and policy makers.

摘要

虽然全球都有推动利用科学证据为政策制定提供信息的趋势,但在培训科学家和政策制定者进行这种互动方面却做得很少。如果我们想弥合学术界、科学知识与政策之间的差距,就必须首先为参与者和利益相关者提供正规培训和技能培养。科学家没有接受过沟通和为政策提供信息的培训,政策制定者也没有接受过理解科学过程和评估证据的培训。营造一个能使这种合作蓬勃发展的环境,取决于教授针对决策过程的特定能力。作为具有科学背景的政策教授,我们已开始教授关于在政策制定中使用科学证据的初级课程。学生和机构的反馈是积极的,为其他学校和机构开设类似课程甚至开辟新的职业道路铺平了道路。本文旨在分享我们在设计和教授旨在培训政策制定者的课程方面的经验。展望未来,我们计划为理科专业学生提供培训,从而涵盖这一对话的两个主要方面,并为科学家和政策制定者创造新的职业机会。