不确定性的价值:寨卡病毒和小儿科的联系

Q3 Medicine
Denise Silva Matias, Luis Cláudio Lemos Correia, Daniel Oliveira Medina da Silva, Larrie Rabelo Laporte, Camila Verônica Souza Freire, Gabriel De Araújo Grisi, Thiago Masashi Taniguchi, Mariana Correia Moreira Cruz
{"title":"不确定性的价值:寨卡病毒和小儿科的联系","authors":"Denise Silva Matias, Luis Cláudio Lemos Correia, Daniel Oliveira Medina da Silva, Larrie Rabelo Laporte, Camila Verônica Souza Freire, Gabriel De Araújo Grisi, Thiago Masashi Taniguchi, Mariana Correia Moreira Cruz","doi":"10.17267/2675-021xevidence.v1i2.2541","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Scientific paradigm violations are common in the medical literature. This article aims to describe the principles that should guide scientific thinking, such as the philosophy of skepticism, the consideration of multiple hypothesis, epidemiological criteria to demonstrate association, concern about random errors and the need to quantify the strength of association. We use the hypothesis of causality between Zika and microcephaly to illustrate these principles and cognitive mechanisms that predispose to its violation. This is an example of dissociation between certainty and level of evidence, since the association between these two entities was confirmed at a time when there was no evidence of quality that supported this association.","PeriodicalId":55996,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The value of uncertainty: the Zika and Microcefalia link\",\"authors\":\"Denise Silva Matias, Luis Cláudio Lemos Correia, Daniel Oliveira Medina da Silva, Larrie Rabelo Laporte, Camila Verônica Souza Freire, Gabriel De Araújo Grisi, Thiago Masashi Taniguchi, Mariana Correia Moreira Cruz\",\"doi\":\"10.17267/2675-021xevidence.v1i2.2541\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Scientific paradigm violations are common in the medical literature. This article aims to describe the principles that should guide scientific thinking, such as the philosophy of skepticism, the consideration of multiple hypothesis, epidemiological criteria to demonstrate association, concern about random errors and the need to quantify the strength of association. We use the hypothesis of causality between Zika and microcephaly to illustrate these principles and cognitive mechanisms that predispose to its violation. This is an example of dissociation between certainty and level of evidence, since the association between these two entities was confirmed at a time when there was no evidence of quality that supported this association.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55996,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17267/2675-021xevidence.v1i2.2541\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17267/2675-021xevidence.v1i2.2541","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

违反科学范式在医学文献中很常见。本文旨在描述应指导科学思维的原则,如怀疑主义哲学、对多种假设的考虑、证明关联的流行病学标准、对随机误差的关注以及量化关联强度的必要性。我们使用寨卡病毒和小头症之间的因果关系假设来说明这些原则和容易违反的认知机制。这是确定性和证据水平分离的一个例子,因为这两个实体之间的联系是在没有质量证据支持这种联系的情况下得到证实的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The value of uncertainty: the Zika and Microcefalia link
Scientific paradigm violations are common in the medical literature. This article aims to describe the principles that should guide scientific thinking, such as the philosophy of skepticism, the consideration of multiple hypothesis, epidemiological criteria to demonstrate association, concern about random errors and the need to quantify the strength of association. We use the hypothesis of causality between Zika and microcephaly to illustrate these principles and cognitive mechanisms that predispose to its violation. This is an example of dissociation between certainty and level of evidence, since the association between these two entities was confirmed at a time when there was no evidence of quality that supported this association.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: ​​The International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare is the official journal of the Joanna Briggs Institute. It is a fully refereed journal that publishes manuscripts relating to evidence-based medicine and evidence-based practice. It publishes papers containing reliable evidence to assist health professionals in their evaluation and decision-making, and to inform health professionals, students and researchers of outcomes, debates and developments in evidence-based medicine and healthcare. ​ The journal provides a unique home for publication of systematic reviews (quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, economic, scoping and prevalence) and implementation projects including the synthesis, transfer and utilisation of evidence in clinical practice. Original scholarly work relating to the synthesis (translation science), transfer (distribution) and utilization (implementation science and evaluation) of evidence to inform multidisciplinary healthcare practice is considered for publication. The journal also publishes original scholarly commentary pieces relating to the generation and synthesis of evidence for practice and quality improvement, the use and evaluation of evidence in practice, and the process of conducting systematic reviews (methodology) which covers quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, economic, scoping and prevalence methods. In addition, the journal’s content includes implementation projects including the transfer and utilisation of evidence in clinical practice as well as providing a forum for the debate of issues surrounding evidence-based healthcare.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信