Interdisciplinary Approach to a Diachronic Medical Symbol of Healing

Abstract

To the Editor: Scientific research involves putting forth a clear hypothesis, performing a systematic and versatile assessment of actual facts and data, and using novel ideas and integrative models for the investigation of an area of concern. Integral to the holistic view of a scientific problem is the multi-, inter-, and transdisciplinary research. This is conceptualized as a collaborative effort to move scientists beyond the boundaries of their own discipline and provide an interactive perspective and innovative approach to problem-solving. Such an interdisciplinary paradigm is clearly visualized in our article investigating the evolution of an ancient and diachronic medical symbol and critically reviewing its interactions with ethical beliefs and applications in modern medicine [1]. Because of the intriguing, multifaceted, complex nature of the subject, we embarked on a collaborative interdisciplinary, intercultural process. Various scientific fields—including ancient history, theology, medicine, social science, history of social science and medicine, and the science of ethics—and researchers from the corresponding areas and from different cultural backgrounds were recruited to provide insight into the opposing meanings of a healing symbol in medical practice and their ethicosociologic perceptions. We were disappointed to encounter a letter published in the same volume as the original report that essentially rejected the interdisciplinarity of the work and blamed the authors for ‘‘gift authorship’’ [2]. We do not think that it would be prudent to comment on the content of this letter. Apart from its legal and ethical implications, it lacks any scientific merit, as it bases its arguments on groundless presumptions, with no basic research having been performed on which to base the conclusions, a process that constitutes a basic principle of scientific research. However, to avoid any misconceptions regarding the current modes of scientific research, we present a few related points after having performed a review of the literature and investigated the currently used approaches and practices. Increasing globalization, which is characterized by the communication of knowledge and exchange of information, and the current pace and complexity of science have instigated the implementation of innovative interdisciplinary methods of research. In a collaborative research process, two or more persons from different disciplines (interdisciplinary collaboration) belonging to the same (national) or different (international) countries study a problem of mutual concern. They investigate the problem systematically and ultimately achieve increased insight. In an article proposing a conceptual framework of the knowledge universe, Choi and Pak concluded that disciplines that are disparate from one another epistemologically are more likely to achieve new insight into a complex problem [3]. Interactions between researchers from different fields open up existing disciplinary barriers, provide insight into phenomena from different angles, and enhance creativity, leading to an integrated multiscience [4]. Furthermore, the interpersonal relationship of the researchers engaging in collaborative research has been found to favor interactive communication and the ability to achieve total G. A. Antoniou Vascular Institute, Northern General Hospital, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals, Sheffield, UK