Critical epidemiological literacy: understanding ideas better when placed in relation to alternatives.

This article describes contrasting ideas for a set of topics in epidemiological thinking. The premise underlying this contribution to the special edition is that researchers develop their epidemiological thinking over time through interactions with other researchers who have a variety of in-practice...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Synthese Vol. 198; pp. 2411 - 2439
Autor principal: Taylor, Peter J.
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Springer Nature May2021 Supplement 9
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=150591689&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 150591689
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00397857
        4LI
      jtl: Synthese
      issn: 00397857
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: May2021 Supplement 9
      vid: 198
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
    artinfo:
      ui:
        150591689
        10.1007/s11229-018-01960-6
      ppf: 2411
      ppct: 28
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 619KB
      tig:
        atl: Critical epidemiological literacy: understanding ideas better when placed in relation to alternatives.
      aug:
        au: Taylor, Peter J.
        affil: Science in a Changing World Graduate Track, University of Massachusetts, 02125, Boston, MA, USA
      su:
        Critical literacy
        Critical thinking
        Statistics
        Comprehension
        Data analysis
      sug:
        subj:
          Critical literacy
          Critical thinking
          Statistics
          Comprehension
          Data analysis
      keyword:
        Causality
        Description–prescription
        Heterogeneity
        Inequality
        Intervention
      ab: This article describes contrasting ideas for a set of topics in epidemiological thinking. The premise underlying this contribution to the special edition is that researchers develop their epidemiological thinking over time through interactions with other researchers who have a variety of in-practice commitments, such as to kinds of cases and methods of analysis, and not simply to a philosophical framework for explanation. I encourage discussants from philosophy and epidemiology to draw purposefully from across a range of topics and contrasting positions, and thereby pursue critical thinking in the sense of understanding ideas and practices better when we examine them in relation to alternatives. After an initial topic concerning practices for developing epidemiological literacy, a number of conceptual steps follow—the characterization of the very phenomena we might be concerned with, the scope and challenges of the field of epidemiology, the formulation of categories—before linking associations, predictions, causes and interventions and examining the confounding of purported links. Building on that conceptual basis, the remaining topics consist of issues or angles of analysis related to the complexities of inequalities within and between populations, context, and changes over the life course. The organization of topics derives from a graduate course that I teach that aims for epidemiological literacy, not technical ability in statistical formulas and data analysis, and shares the underlying premise and critical thinking goals of this article. During the topic-by-topic description, some assertions about explanation and intervention emerge, notably, that epidemiological–philosophical discussion about causality often leaves unclear or unexamined whether a modifiable factor shown to have been associated with a difference in the data from past observations should be thought of as factor that, when modified, would generate that difference going forward. The article concludes with a "Limitations of this Study" section that teases out different kinds of description–prescription relationship that are implied in undertaking philosophy of epidemiology and identifies some other considerations that are implied but not emphasized by this article.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Synthese is a copyright of Springer, 2021. All Rights Reserved.
      item: Synthese
      holder: Springer Nature
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2021
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N