.png){kind=icon}
返回
Toolkit for detecting misused epidemiological methods
.png){kind=icon}
OA
AI
DOI：10.1186/s12940-021-00771-6.png)
.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
分享.png){kind=icon}
收藏
摘要
En 中文
Background: Critical knowledge of what we know about health and disease, risk factors, causation, prevention, and treatment, derives from epidemiology. Unfortunately, its methods and language can be misused and improperly applied. A repertoire of methods, techniques, arguments, and tactics are used by some people to manipulate science, usually in the service of powerful interests, and particularly those with a financial stake related to toxic agents. Such interests work to foment uncertainty, cast doubt, and mislead decision makers by seeding confusion about cause-and-effect relating to population health. We have compiled a toolkit of the methods used by those whose interests are not aligned with the public health sciences. Professional epidemiologists, as well as those who rely on their work, will thereby be more readily equipped to detect bias and flaws resulting from financial conflict-of-interest, improper study design, data collection, analysis, or interpretation, bringing greater clarity-not only to the advancement of knowledge, but, more immediately, to policy debates. Methods: The summary of techniques used to manipulate epidemiological findings, compiled as part of the 2020 Position Statement of the International Network for Epidemiology in Policy (INEP) entitled Conflict-of-Interest and Disclosure in Epidemiology, has been expanded and further elucidated in this commentary. Results: Some level of uncertainty is inherent in science. However, corrupted and incomplete literature contributes to confuse, foment further uncertainty, and cast doubt about the evidence under consideration. Confusion delays scientific advancement and leads to the inability of policymakers to make changes that, if enacted, would-supported by the body of valid evidence-protect, maintain, and improve public health. An accessible toolkit is provided that brings attention to the misuse of the methods of epidemiology. Its usefulness is as a compendium of what those trained in epidemiology, as well as those reviewing epidemiological studies, should identify methodologically when assessing the transparency and validity of any epidemiological inquiry, evaluation, or argument. The problems resulting from financial conflicting interests and the misuse of scientific methods, in conjunction with the strategies that can be used to safeguard public health against them, apply not only to epidemiologists, but also to other public health professionals. Conclusions: This novel toolkit is for use in protecting the public. It is provided to assist public health professionals as gatekeepers of their respective specialty and subspecialty disciplines whose mission includes protecting, maintaining, and improving the public's health. It is intended to serve our roles as educators, reviewers, and researchers.
Keyword:
Disinformation
Ethics
Flawed science
Manufactured scientific controversy
Obfuscation
Partiality
Public policy
Research integrity
Scientific misconduct
Undue influence
AI总结
对已上传原文的论文进行重点信息的提取，主要内容包括：简要概述、研究摘要、背景介绍、关键亮点、图文解析、展望与总结。
期刊
E
IF:
5.9
论文数:
2.1K
被引数:
9.1K
机构
引用论文
Key Characteristics of Carcinogens as a Basis for Organizing Data on Mechanisms of CarcinogenesisOAAI
OAAI分享收藏分享收藏How can the integrity of occupational and environmental health research be maintained in the presence of conflicting interests?.png)
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTHOAAI
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTHIF5.9
OAAI分享收藏
查看更多内容