{"title":"现代科技中的两种文化:为了安全与有效性,医学必须更新吗?","authors":"R. Becker","doi":"10.1097/PTS.0000000000000260","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Two different scientific cultures go unreconciled in modern medicine. Each culture accepts that scientific knowledge and technologies are vulnerable to and easily invalidated by methods and conditions of acquisition, interpretation, and application. How these vulnerabilities are addressed separates the 2 cultures and potentially explains medicine's difficulties eradicating errors. A traditional culture, dominant in medicine, leaves error control in the hands of individual and group investigators and practitioners. A competing modern scientific culture accepts errors as inevitable, pernicious, and pervasive sources of adverse events throughout medical research and patient care too malignant for individuals or groups to control. Error risks to the validity of scientific knowledge and safety in patient care require systemwide programming able to support a culture in medicine grounded in tested, continually updated, widely promulgated, and uniformly implemented standards of practice for research and patient care. Experiences from successes in other sciences and industries strongly support the need for leadership from the Institute of Medicine's recommended Center for Patient Safely within the Federal Executive branch of government.","PeriodicalId":206245,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Patient Safety","volume":"201 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Two Cultures in Modern Science and Technology: For Safety and Validity Does Medicine Have to Update?\",\"authors\":\"R. Becker\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/PTS.0000000000000260\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Two different scientific cultures go unreconciled in modern medicine. Each culture accepts that scientific knowledge and technologies are vulnerable to and easily invalidated by methods and conditions of acquisition, interpretation, and application. How these vulnerabilities are addressed separates the 2 cultures and potentially explains medicine's difficulties eradicating errors. A traditional culture, dominant in medicine, leaves error control in the hands of individual and group investigators and practitioners. A competing modern scientific culture accepts errors as inevitable, pernicious, and pervasive sources of adverse events throughout medical research and patient care too malignant for individuals or groups to control. Error risks to the validity of scientific knowledge and safety in patient care require systemwide programming able to support a culture in medicine grounded in tested, continually updated, widely promulgated, and uniformly implemented standards of practice for research and patient care. Experiences from successes in other sciences and industries strongly support the need for leadership from the Institute of Medicine's recommended Center for Patient Safely within the Federal Executive branch of government.\",\"PeriodicalId\":206245,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Patient Safety\",\"volume\":\"201 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Patient Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000260\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Patient Safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PTS.0000000000000260","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Two Cultures in Modern Science and Technology: For Safety and Validity Does Medicine Have to Update?
Two different scientific cultures go unreconciled in modern medicine. Each culture accepts that scientific knowledge and technologies are vulnerable to and easily invalidated by methods and conditions of acquisition, interpretation, and application. How these vulnerabilities are addressed separates the 2 cultures and potentially explains medicine's difficulties eradicating errors. A traditional culture, dominant in medicine, leaves error control in the hands of individual and group investigators and practitioners. A competing modern scientific culture accepts errors as inevitable, pernicious, and pervasive sources of adverse events throughout medical research and patient care too malignant for individuals or groups to control. Error risks to the validity of scientific knowledge and safety in patient care require systemwide programming able to support a culture in medicine grounded in tested, continually updated, widely promulgated, and uniformly implemented standards of practice for research and patient care. Experiences from successes in other sciences and industries strongly support the need for leadership from the Institute of Medicine's recommended Center for Patient Safely within the Federal Executive branch of government.