Concepts of Actionability in Precision Oncology.
"Actionability" is a key concept in precision oncology. Its precise definition, however, remains contested. This article undertakes a philosophical analysis of "actionability" to aid in conceptual clarification. We map distinct concepts of actionability, arguing that each is best understood as a con...
| Publicado en: | Philosophy of Science Vol. 91; no. 5; pp. 1349 - 1361 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Cambridge University Press
Dec2024
|
| 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=180968250&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 180968250 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00318248 PSC jtl: Philosophy of Science issn: 00318248 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Dec2024 vid: 91 iid: 5 pid: 15979 pub: Cambridge University Press artinfo: ui: 180968250 10.1017/psa.2023.115 ppf: 1349 ppct: 12 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 231KB tig: atl: Concepts of Actionability in Precision Oncology. aug: au: Chin-Yee, Benjamin Plutynski, Anya affil: Department of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK Division of Hematology, Department of Medicine, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, Ontario, Canada Department of Philosophy, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, USA su: Concept mapping Philosophers Pluralism Medical personnel Oncology sug: subj: Concept mapping Philosophers Pluralism Medical personnel Oncology ab: "Actionability" is a key concept in precision oncology. Its precise definition, however, remains contested. This article undertakes a philosophical analysis of "actionability" to aid in conceptual clarification. We map distinct concepts of actionability, arguing that each is best understood as a contextually objective category articulated to mitigate risk of "conceptual slippage." We defend "interactive pluralism," acknowledging the need for distinct concepts but also for conceptual interaction in practice. This article thus offers insights for both practitioners and philosophers, clarifying approaches to actionability for scientists and clinicians and serving as a case study to test competing views on scientific pluralism. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Philosophy of Science is the property of Cambridge University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Philosophy of Science holder: Cambridge University Press dt: @attributes: year: 2024 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|