PhilSci Archive

Critical Epidemiological Literacy: Understanding Ideas Better When Placed in Relation to Alternatives

Taylor, Peter J. (2018) Critical Epidemiological Literacy: Understanding Ideas Better When Placed in Relation to Alternatives. [Preprint]

[img] Text
SyntheseRev3APaper.doc

Download (211kB)

Abstract

This article describes contrasting ideas for a set of topics in epidemiological thinking. The premise underlying this contribution to the special edition is that researchers develop their epidemiological thinking over time through interactions with other researchers who have a variety of in-practice commitments, such as to kinds of cases and methods of analysis, and not simply to a philosophical framework for explanation. I encourage discussants from philosophy and epidemiology to draw purposefully from across a range of topics and contrasting positions, and thereby pursue critical thinking in the sense of understanding ideas and practices better when we examine them in relation to alternatives. After an initial topic concerning practices for developing epidemiological literacy, a number of conceptual steps follow—the characterization of the very phenomena we might be concerned with, the scope and challenges of the field of epidemiology, the formulation of categories—before linking associations, predictions, causes and interventions and examining the confounding of purported links. Building on that conceptual basis, the remaining topics consist of issues or angles of analysis related to the complexities of inequalities within and between populations, context, and changes over the life course. The organization of topics derives from a graduate course that I teach that aims for epidemiological literacy, not technical ability in statistical formulas and data analysis, and shares the underlying premise and critical thinking goals of this article. During the topic-by-topic description, some assertions about explanation and intervention emerge, notably, that epidemiological-philosophical discussion about causality often leaves unclear or unexamined whether a modifiable factor shown to have been associated with a difference in the data from past observations should be thought of as factor that, when modified, would generate that difference going forward. The article concludes with a “Limitations of this Study” section that teases out different kinds of description-prescription relationship that are implied in undertaking philosophy of epidemiology and identifies some other considerations that are implied but not emphasized by this article.


Export/Citation: EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL
Social Networking:
Share |

Item Type: Preprint
Creators:
CreatorsEmailORCID
Taylor, Peter J.peter.taylor@umb.edu0000-0002-9242-8658
Keywords: causality, critical thinking, description-prescription, heterogeneity, inequality, intervention
Subjects: General Issues > History of Philosophy of Science
Depositing User: Dr. Peter Taylor
Date Deposited: 24 Sep 2018 14:55
Last Modified: 24 Sep 2018 14:55
Item ID: 15049
Subjects: General Issues > History of Philosophy of Science
Date: 24 September 2018
URI: https://philsci-archive-dev.library.pitt.edu/id/eprint/15049

Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years

Plum Analytics

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item