Experience, knowledge and evidence: a comparison of research relations in health and anthropology
Experience, knowledge and evidence: a comparison of research relations in health and anthropology
复制标题
DOI：
10.1332/174426413x663751
复制
发表时间：
2013-01-01
影响因子：
2.1
通讯作者：
McKevitt, Christopher
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
McKevitt, Christopher
至少十年来，英国卫生部及其研究资助机构一直在推动患者和公众参与健康研究。促进这一点的政策辞令是基于这样一种理念，即可以利用患者的经验知识来提高卫生研究的质量和相关性。本文运用后殖民人类学批评的比较案例，提出了对支撑经验知识假设的隐性和显性主张的思考方式。它侧重于辩论的三个领域：内部知识和真实性;客观性/主观性;道德和政治参与。
Patient and public involvement in health research has been promoted by the United Kingdom's Department of Health and its research funding agencies for at least a decade. The policy rhetoric through which it is promoted is based on the idea that patients' experiential knowledge can be harnessed to improve the quality and relevance of health research. This paper uses the comparative case of post-colonial critiques of anthropology to propose ways of thinking about the implicit and explicit claims underpinning assumptions about experiential knowledge. It focuses on three areas of debate: insider knowledge, and authenticity; objectivity/subjectivity; and ethical and political engagement.