The Cultural Politics of 'Implementation Science'
The Cultural Politics of 'Implementation Science'
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s10912-020-09607-9
复制
发表时间：
2020-09-01
影响因子：
0.9
通讯作者：
Sevdalis, Nick
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Boulton, Richard;Sandall, Jane;Sevdalis, Nick
尽管“执行科学”的地位越来越高，但它作为一个研究领域的地位仍然不明确。实施科学起源于循证运动，并试图扩大循证医学的范围，以提高“临床有效性”，缩小“实施差距”。为了实现这一议程，实施科学借鉴社会科学的方法论，强调定性和定量方法之间的一致性。在这样做的时候，我们问，这是否以忽视循证运动的主导趋势为代价，并考虑所采用的一些方法是否应被认为与基于证据的方法不一致。
Despite the growing profile of 'implementation science', its status as a field of study remains ambiguous. Implementation science originates in the evidence-based movement and attempts to broaden the scope of evidence-based medicine to improve 'clinical effectiveness' and close the 'implementation gap'. To achieve this agenda, implementation science draws on methodologies from the social sciences to emphasise coherence between qualitative and quantitative approaches. In so doing, we ask if this is at the expense of ignoring the dominating tendencies of the evidence-based movement and consider if some of the methodologies being drawn on should be considered irreconcilable with evidence-based methodologies.