Eleanor A Byrne, Havi Carel, Fred Cooper, Dan Degerman, Alice Monypenny, Matthew Broome
{"title":"对Nielsen, Nordgaard & Henriksen(2025)的“医疗保健中认知不公正的基本问题”的回复:通讯作者。","authors":"Eleanor A Byrne, Havi Carel, Fred Cooper, Dan Degerman, Alice Monypenny, Matthew Broome","doi":"10.1007/s11019-026-10392-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Nielsen et al. (2025) have recently argued that the study of epistemic injustice in healthcare is subject to issues that, left unaddressed, threaten the ongoing research programme. One of their central worries is a lack of appropriate empirical evidence to support claims about the ubiquity and seriousness of these epistemic injustices which are commonly endorsed and rehearsed in publications on the topic. As researchers on the project Epistemic Injustice in Healthcare (EPIC), we offer responses to their concerns. While we sympathise with and develop some of their concerns, we express caution regarding others. We argue for an ongoing research agenda which is empirically-informed but maintains a pluralistic approach to research methods and approaches. This, we argue, is necessary in order to accommodate the complex social phenomenon of epistemic injustice in healthcare contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":47449,"journal":{"name":"Medicine Health Care and Philosophy","volume":" ","pages":"1149-1161"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13652871/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A reply to \\\"Fundamental issues in epistemic injustice in healthcare\\\" by Nielsen, Nordgaard & Henriksen (2025) : Corresponding author.\",\"authors\":\"Eleanor A Byrne, Havi Carel, Fred Cooper, Dan Degerman, Alice Monypenny, Matthew Broome\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11019-026-10392-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Nielsen et al. (2025) have recently argued that the study of epistemic injustice in healthcare is subject to issues that, left unaddressed, threaten the ongoing research programme. One of their central worries is a lack of appropriate empirical evidence to support claims about the ubiquity and seriousness of these epistemic injustices which are commonly endorsed and rehearsed in publications on the topic. As researchers on the project Epistemic Injustice in Healthcare (EPIC), we offer responses to their concerns. While we sympathise with and develop some of their concerns, we express caution regarding others. We argue for an ongoing research agenda which is empirically-informed but maintains a pluralistic approach to research methods and approaches. This, we argue, is necessary in order to accommodate the complex social phenomenon of epistemic injustice in healthcare contexts.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47449,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medicine Health Care and Philosophy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1149-1161\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13652871/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medicine Health Care and Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-026-10392-w\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2026/8/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicine Health Care and Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-026-10392-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/8/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
A reply to "Fundamental issues in epistemic injustice in healthcare" by Nielsen, Nordgaard & Henriksen (2025) : Corresponding author.
Nielsen et al. (2025) have recently argued that the study of epistemic injustice in healthcare is subject to issues that, left unaddressed, threaten the ongoing research programme. One of their central worries is a lack of appropriate empirical evidence to support claims about the ubiquity and seriousness of these epistemic injustices which are commonly endorsed and rehearsed in publications on the topic. As researchers on the project Epistemic Injustice in Healthcare (EPIC), we offer responses to their concerns. While we sympathise with and develop some of their concerns, we express caution regarding others. We argue for an ongoing research agenda which is empirically-informed but maintains a pluralistic approach to research methods and approaches. This, we argue, is necessary in order to accommodate the complex social phenomenon of epistemic injustice in healthcare contexts.
期刊介绍:
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy: A European Journal is the official journal of the European Society for Philosophy of Medicine and Health Care. It provides a forum for international exchange of research data, theories, reports and opinions in bioethics and philosophy of medicine. The journal promotes interdisciplinary studies, and stimulates philosophical analysis centered on a common object of reflection: health care, the human effort to deal with disease, illness, death as well as health, well-being and life. Particular attention is paid to developing contributions from all European countries, and to making accessible scientific work and reports on the practice of health care ethics, from all nations, cultures and language areas in Europe.