Interpretation Of Scientific Evidence Research Articles

Sociology of Obesity: How to Justify Fighting against the Development of the Obesity Epidemic

Obesity, a complex social issue with profound health implications, intersects with various facets of society, from cultural norms to economic structures. This paper explores the sociology of obesity through multiple lenses, examining its social construction, the evaluation of societal perceptions, and the stigmatisation of obese individuals. It scrutinises the medicalisation of obesity and its consequences, urging caution in policy interventions and the interpretation of scientific evidence. Furthermore, it advocates for a nuanced approach to obesity prevention, emphasising the importance of public health policies grounded in evidence-based practices and a shared responsibility across diverse sectors. By delving into the intricate interplay between science, society. and culture, this research underscores the legitimate conditions of public health actions in fighting against the development of the obesity epidemic.

Selection and Interpretation of Scientific Evidence in Preparation for Policy Decisions: A Case Study Regarding Introduction of Rotavirus Vaccine Into National Immunization Programs in Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Denmark.

The World Health Organization recommends inclusion of rotavirus vaccines in national immunization programs (NIPs) worldwide. Nordic countries are usually considered comparable in terms of demographics and health-care services and have comparable rotavirus disease burden. Nevertheless, the countries have reached different decisions regarding rotavirus vaccine: Norway and Finland have already introduced rotavirus vaccines into their NIPs and Sweden is currently changing its recommendation and vaccines will now be introduced on a national scale while Denmark has decided against it. This study focuses on the selection and interpretation of medical and epidemiological evidence used during the decision-making processes in Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Denmark. The so-called “severity criteria” is identified as one of the main reasons for the different policy decisions reached across the Nordic countries.

Happiness is the Right Metric to Measure Good Societal Functioning

Professor Etzioni argues that ‘happiness’ is ‘the wrong metric’ as a measure of a good society. He argues from the perspective of Communitarian Philosophy and uses two kinds of happiness evidence. One is correlational results from survey data and the other concerns ‘self-actualization’ as the highest-order need proposed by Maslow. Unfortunately, both kinds of evidence are flawed for this purpose. First, contemporary understanding of happiness allows a different perspective from the one depicted. Second, correlational results from cross-sectional studies cannot be used to conclude causation. Third, the construct of self-actualization has been discredited as having scientific validity. Overall, Etzioni’s argument rests on an outdated conception of happiness and the invalid interpretation of scientific evidence. It is concluded that happiness is the right metric by which to judge a successful society, as long as the nature of measured happiness is understood.

Using a discussion about scientific controversy to teach central concepts in experimental design

SummaryStudents may need explicit training in informal statistical reasoning in order to design experiments or use formal statistical tests effectively. By using scientific scandals and media misinterpretation, we can explore the need for good experimental design in an informal way. This article describes the use of a paper that reviews the measles mumps rubella vaccine and autism controversy in the UK to illustrate a number of threshold concepts underlying good study design and interpretation of scientific evidence. These include the necessity of sufficient sample size, representative and random sampling, appropriate controls and inferring causation.

Factors influencing rheumatologists' prescription of biological treatment in rheumatoid arthritis: an interview study.

BackgroundThe introduction of biological drugs involved a fundamental change in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The extent to which biological drugs are prescribed to RA patients in different regions in Sweden varies greatly. Previous research has indicated that differences in health care practice at the regional level might obscure differences at the individual level. The objective of this study is to explore what influences individual rheumatologists’ decisions when prescribing biological drugs.MethodSemi-structured interviews, utilizing closed- and open-ended questions, were conducted with senior rheumatologists, selected through a mix of random and purposive sampling. The interview questions consisted of two parts, with a “parallel mixed method” approach. In the first and main part, open-ended exploratory questions were posed about factors influencing prescription. In the second part, the rheumatologists were asked to rate predefined factors that might influence their prescription decisions. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used as a conceptual framework for data collection and analysis.ResultsTwenty-six rheumatologists were interviewed. A constellation of various factors and their interaction influenced rheumatologists’ prescribing decisions, including the individual rheumatologist’s experiences and perceptions of the evidence, the structure of the department including responsibility for costs, peer pressure, political and administrative influences, and participation in clinical trials. The patient as an actor emerged as an important factor. Hence, factors both at organizational and individual levels influenced the prescribing of biological drugs. The factors should not be seen as individual influences but were described as influencing prescription in an interactive, nonlinear way.ConclusionsPotential factors explaining differences in prescription practice are experience and perception of the evidence on the individual level and the structure of the department and participation in clinical trials on the organizational level. The influence of patient attitudes and preferences and interpretation of scientific evidence seemed to be somewhat contradictory in the qualitative responses as compared to the quantitative rating, and this needs further exploration. An implication of the present study is that in addition to scientific knowledge, attempts to influence prescription behavior need to be multifactorial and account for interactions of factors between different actors.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-014-0153-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Abstract 254: How can epidemiology become more effective in reducing the burden of cancer in the 21st century? An analysis of NCI-funded grants and the scientific literature

Abstract Background: Concurrent with an NCI sponsored 2012 workshop on the future of cancer epidemiology, a set of “drivers” were identified to accelerate the field of cancer epidemiology across the translational research continuum in the 21st century: (i) emerging technologies; (ii) multi-level analyses and interventions; (iii) knowledge integration from basic, clinical and population sciences; and (iv) collaboration and team science. Objective: To map the evolution of identified “drivers” and key translational phases (T0-T4) in the past decade. Methods: We analyzed grants funded by the NCI's Epidemiology and Genomics Research Program and published literature for 2000, 2005, and 2010. For each year, we evaluated the aims of all new and competing grants and randomly selected 100 cancer epidemiology articles from PubMed. We used two-sample t-tests to compare differences between “drivers” and multivariate logistic regression to investigate the relationship between multi-institutional collaboration and the remaining “drivers”. Results: Our results show a significant shift from single-institution studies that focused on traditional questionnaire-based epidemiology studies to technology-driven, multi-disciplinary consortia-driven studies for both NCI grants and published literature. Compared to grants that were single-institution-based, consortia grants were significantly more likely to incorporate key contemporary technologies (OR= 3.53; 95% CI=1.44-8.61; p-value = 0.005) and engaged in multi-level analyses (OR =2.27; 95% CI=1.06-4.86, p-value=0.035). The vast majority of grants (82%) and publications (86%) analyzed were discovery (T0) or characterization (T1) research suggesting a critical need for more T2-T4 translational studies. Our evaluation also indicates a dearth of research in two areas: 1) multi-level analyses that takes into account the combination of molecular, individual, social and environmental determinants and 2) knowledge integration that evaluates the robustness and interpretation of scientific evidence derived from basic, clinical and population sciences. Summary: Cancer epidemiology is at the cusp of a paradigm shift–propelled by a need to accelerate the pace of translating scientific discoveries to impart population health benefits. While multi-institutional and technology-drive collaboration is happening, our evaluation of funded grants and published literature in the first decade of the 21st century provide concrete evidence that concerted efforts to incorporate other key elements that influence the future of cancer epidemiology are warranted for the discipline to meet the challenges of this changing landscape. Citation Format: Tram K. Lam, Christine Q. Chang, Scott D. Rogers, Muin J. Khoury, Sheri D. Schully. How can epidemiology become more effective in reducing the burden of cancer in the 21st century? An analysis of NCI-funded grants and the scientific literature. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 105th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2014 Apr 5-9; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2014;74(19 Suppl):Abstract nr 254. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2014-254

Beyond memorization: an intermediate-level paleontology activity that integrates anatomy, ecology, and macroevolutionary theory using trilobites

Here we present a stand-alone, upper level undergraduate laboratory exercise that integrates organismal ecology and evolutionary concepts and minimizes the need for student memorization. This laboratory seeks to integrate both anatomical and conceptual content into paleontology lab pedagogy by demonstrating how taxon-specific anatomical information are the fundamental data by which scientists evaluate big picture questions related to the study of macroevolution and ecology. Real specimen photos are provided to familiarize students with a relatively limited suite of anatomical terms and taxonomic detail while allowing schools lacking large paleontology collections to participate in specimen-based inquiry. A matching exercise requires students to assign various trilobite morphologies to their interpreted ecological niches, thus reinforcing the students’ new anatomical knowledge and helping students to distinguish between primary and secondary interpretation of scientific evidence. The use of trilobites as a macroevolutionary case study introduces students to questions still being actively investigated by scientists and provides an effective refutation of creationist arguments. By deemphasizing systematics and highlighting intriguing patterns from the recent published literature, this laboratory hopes to promote paleontology as a vibrant and relevant field, and avoid the misconception that paleontologists are simply stamp collectors, intent on naming and categorizing fossils. We hope that the broad implementation of this laboratory exercise will generate the data necessary to evaluate the validity of this approach and its ease of use in the classroom.

‘Wise contrarians’: a keystone species in contemporary climate science, politics and policy

In the 1980s, celebrity climate contrarians, which we might understand as a kind of ‘keystone species’ or ‘charismatic megafauna’, emerged through resistance to dominant interpretations of scientific evidence, and through divergent views regarding what are the best ways to respond to climate threats. Our research here examines the growth pathways of these beings through historical accounts of the ‘Wise Use’ movements rooted in the United States (US) West, as well as interview data and participant observations at the 2011 Heartland Institute’s Sixth International Conference on Climate Change, and through tracking of media coverage of climate change and contrarian think tanks over the last 25 years. This contribution helps to better understand celebrity climate contrarians embedded in countermovement activities through a threefold analysis: of the motivations that prop up these contrarian stances, such as ideological or evidentiary disagreement to the orthodox views of science (also known as scientific consensus); the drive to fulfil the perceived desires of special interests (for example, carbon-based industry); and the exhilaration from self-perceived academic martyrdom and the more general desire for notoriety. In these ways, celebrity is a vehicle for influence, and influence is vital to decision-making within the dynamic architectures of contemporary climate science, politics and policy.

Interpretation, Constraint, and the Prospects of Scientific Realism

Interpretation, Constraint, and the Prospects of Scientific Realism I explore the interaction between theory-based interpretations of scientific evidence and constraints on theories provided by that evidence. Interpretation is often viewed as a source of error and a reason for scepticism about scientific results. But, I argue, while interpretation does generate epistemic risk, it also points to new sources of evidence that can constrain our theories. This is especially clear in the development of instrumentation that increases the range of our interactions with nature. While the design of such instruments and the interpretation of their outputs are deeply dependent on theory-based interpretations, these outputs can still challenge those very theories. At the same time, theory-guided instrumentation provides us access to aspects of nature that we cannot study with our unaided senses. This access allows us to extend the range of evidence that we collect, and thus increases the constraints on our theories. As a result, theory-guided evidence collection has a positive impact on the prospects of scientific realism since these increasing constraints on our theories provide our only reason for thinking that we may be approaching the development of true theories.

Vitamin D and parathyroid hormone: a tool to determine assay specific cutoff values for vitamin D1

Abstract> Vitamin D has been attributed a role in the pathogenesis of various chronic diseases. Vitamin D status is best assessed by measuring serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D(25[OH]D). Serum 25(OH)D concentrations far above the deficiency threshold for skeletal health may be suboptimal with respect to long-term health consequences. No final consensus has so far been reached regarding an appropriate cutoff value. Diagnostic work-up in the clinical setting as well as the interpretation of scientific evidence are hampered by a lack of standardization in 25(OH)D assays. The present study compares quantification of serum 25(OH)D by means of three different assays: an in-house high-performance liquid chromatograph (HPLC)-method, and two chemiluminescence immunoassays (CLI) from different manufacturers (DiaSorin, Nichols). In addition, serum intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) was measured using two different methods (CLI, DiaSorin; electrochemiluminescence immunoassay [ECL], Roche). Based on the inverse relationship between vitamin D and PTH in the regulation of serum calcium, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were used to determine assay specific serum 25(OH)D cutoff values that distinguished at best between normal and elevated serum iPTH according to the manufacturers given reference ranges. Obtained cutoff values identified varied from 22.9 μg/L for the HPLC method to 19.5μg/L for the CLI (Nichols) and to 14.4 μg/L for the CLI (DiaSorin), respectively. While these values need to be considered as warning thresholds, they fall within published reference limits for the investigated 25(OH)D assays. Serum iPTH-based cutoff values for serum 25(OH)D are not apt to substitute for assay-specific reference limits for the various long-term adverse health outcomes that may be linked to vitamin D insufficiency.

The Medical Expert in Court: Towards “Evidence-Based Medical Dispute Resolution”

We advocate a systematic approach to evaluating scientific evidence in a particular context, that of law, adjudi- cation and public policy which we call evidence-based medical dispute resolution. The approach adapts methods of evi- dence-based medicine and critical appraisal that are now well accepted in health care to assist a court or an adjudicating body, as in workers' compensation, to weigh evidence in disputes involving health risks. Health and medical knowledge are essential to the resolution of disputes in law and administrative applications (such as workers' compensation) and pro- vide essential input into public policy decisions. There are no socially agreed-upon rules for the application of this knowl- edge except the law. Even within the legal system, courts vary and adjudication systems based on tort law do not always work well, even when the interpretation of scientific evidence is agreed upon by all sides. However, a big part of the vari- ability and inconsistency could be removed if there were agreement on the interpretation of scientific evidence. This can- not be done by rigid rules, of course, because the law does not work this way. It has to be done by social convention.

The Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders

Scott Haldeman, DC, MD, PhD,1 Linda Carroll, PhD,2 J. David Cassidy, DC, PhD, DrMedSc,3 Jon Schubert, CMA,4 and Ake Nygren, DDS, MD, DrMedSc5 1Department of Neurology, University of California, Irvine, CA; Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 2Department of Public Health Sciences, and Alberta Center for Injury Control and Research, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Canada 3Department of Public Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto an Division of Health Outcomes and Research, Toronto Western Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada 4CEO–SGI, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada 5Department of Clinical Sciences, Danderyd Hospital, Division of Rehabilitation Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden

Prevention and genetic testing for breast cancer: variations in medical decisions

The discovery linking the genes BRCA1&2 to familial breast cancer played an important role in the clinical practice of geneticists and physicians. The availability of genetic tests for BRCA gene mutations prompted cancer geneticists to give information about genetic risk and to assess many women with a personal or family history of breast or ovarian cancer to inform them of preventive measures. These consist mainly of breast self-examination, mammography screening, chemoprevention and prophylactic surgery (mastectomy, oophorectomy). This paper examines clinical practices related to hereditary breast cancer testing and introduces a number of results from a survey carried out, between 1996 and 1998, in three clinics located in Montreal (Quebec, Canada), Marseilles (France) and Manchester (Great Britain). Results show substantial differences in the way cancer geneticists deal with environmental risk factors, breast and ovarian cancer testing, and chemoprevention and prophylactic surgery. Differences across cities persist in the multivariate analysis, suggesting that attitudes towards preventive measures may be partially explained by cultural factors. Different dimensions of culture are discussed including the social representation of health and risk, the interpretation of scientific evidence and the role of innovation leadership.

Political interpretation of scientific evidence: Case study of breast cancer screening policies around the world

Early detection of breast cancer has been studied for effectiveness in reducing mortality for more than four decades. During this period numerous studies took place, with more than half a million participating women. In spite of large amounts of nonconflicting data, different countries took varying lengths of time to establish a policy, and came up with a variety of policies, quite different from one another. Inherent differences between the countries in structure of the health system, in the commitment to public health activities, and in opinions and health habits of the relevant populations may explain these different outcomes.

Session 6 S17. Political interpretation of scientific evidence: Case study of breast cancer screening policies around the world

Session 6 S17. Political interpretation of scientific evidence: Case study of breast cancer screening policies around the world

Methods in epidemiology and public health: does practice match theory?

Epidemiology is widely perceived as a public health discipline within which methodology matters .1 Methods dominate educational curriculums and influential textbooks.2 3Epidemiological societies regularly feature methods sessions at their national...

Probabilistic reasoning in the law: Part 2: assessment of probabilities and explanation of the value of trace evidence other than DNA

Problems associated with the interpretation of scientific evidence (fibres and glass) in forensic science are investigated with reference to measures of uncertainty associated with the presentation of such evidence in an adversarial context. The investigation includes the use of probabilistic arguments associated with expert scientific testimony in the courts. Cases where scientific evidence has been presented in court are studied. A series of problems were developed for, and given to, forensic medicine students' forensic science students and practitioners (advocates and forensic scientists) in Scotland to investigate their understanding of uncertainty.

Interpretation of scientific evidence

Forensic scientists need to express their conclusions in language which is clear, understandable and not open to misinterpretation. Over the years several authors have considered the difficulties of conveying probability estimates verbally to non-scientists. In this paper, statements written by forensic scientists from different disciplines are compared. Even though the statements differ widely because of the different types of analytical work carried out, each may be placed in one of four categories. Ways in which forensic scientists might improve readers' understanding of their statements are discussed. There is a need for a dialogue between forensic scientists, police officers, lawyers and the judiciary to try and reduce mutual incomprehension.