文章摘要
循证科普:如何保证健康科普创作的科学性
Evidence-based Health Popularization: How to Ensure the Scientific Nature of Health Popularization Creation
投稿时间:2018-08-19  修订日期:2019-02-03
DOI:
中文关键词: 循证科普 健康科普 循证医学 科普创作
英文关键词: Evidence-based Health Popularization  Health Popularization  Evidence-based medicine  Health Popularization Creation
基金项目:中国科协研究生科普能力提升项目(项目编号:kxyjskpxm2018019)
作者单位E-mail
潘越 山东大学药学院 Jimmy950721@vip.qq.com 
贾淑娴 山东大学口腔医学院  
陈翔梧 山东大学药学院  
张诗迎 山东大学药学院  
郝国祥 山东大学药学院  
马青坪 山东大学药学院  
宋永朝 河北医科大学第一医院药学部  
吴一波 北京大学药学院药事管理与临床药学系 bjmuwuyibo@outlook.com 
摘要点击次数: 342
全文下载次数: 0
中文摘要:
      随着循证医学的发展,循证思维逐渐被应用到越来越多的领域。为了提升健康科普的科学性,本文从循证思维出发,提出应用循证的理念进行健康科普创作,并在循证视角下提出当前健康科普存在的科学性问题:存在证据选择偏倚、未选用最新证据、可能有未声明的利益冲突、将争议内容当做学术界共识、选用无可靠证据来源支持的专家意见以及科普内容的核心观点没有高级别证据支持。为解决这些问题,在健康科普创作中,我们应当应用循证科普,合理使用检索词和数据库进行最新、有效证据的搜集,利用科学的证据评价方法评价证据,最后结合大众需求和健康素养进行证据的应用。
英文摘要:
      With the development of evidence-based medicine, evidence-based thinking has gradually been applied to more fields. In order to improve the scientific nature of health popularization, this paper proposes the use of evidence-based thinking to create health popularization, and puts forward the scientific problems of health popularization under the evidence-based perspective: There is bias in the choice of evidence, no selection of the latest evidence, there may be undeclared conflicts of interest, the use of controversial content as academic consensus, the selection of expert opinions that are not supported by reliable sources of evidence, and the lack of high-level evidence to support core views. Therefore, in the creation of health popularization, we should apply evidence-based health popularization, rationally use search terms and databases to collect the latest and effective evidence, use scientific evidence evaluation methods to evaluate evidence, and finally combine public demand and health literacy to apply evidence.
View Fulltext   查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器

分享按钮