2013
DOI: 10.1001/virtualmentor.2013.15.1.msoc1-1301
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Paradigms, Coherence, and the Fog of Evidence

Abstract: In the great boarding-house of nature, the cakes and the butter and the syrup seldom come out so even and leave the plates so clean. Indeed, we should view them with scientific suspicion if they did. William James, "The Will to Believe"

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, as Ho observes in his critique of the history of science, medicine, and public health, the relationship between evidence and theory largely depends on individual and collective worldviews for their interpretation and acceptance of new scientific findings and technologies ( 46 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, as Ho observes in his critique of the history of science, medicine, and public health, the relationship between evidence and theory largely depends on individual and collective worldviews for their interpretation and acceptance of new scientific findings and technologies ( 46 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This piece concludes with a personal reflection from the insider perspective of the first author regarding participatory research with recommendations for how this can be improved. Ho (2013) argued that among discussions concerning evidence-based medicine (EBM), questions pertaining to what constitutes evidence and how such evidence relates to how people might act and think based on that evidence are often not fully explored and reflected upon. Ho (2013) suggests that both advocates and critics of EBM assume a relatively unproblematic understanding of what constitutes evidence, with debates often centring upon the scope of clinically relevant evidence rather than the nature of the evidence and how it is produced (in terms of the assumptions regarding a phenomena that researchers have).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%