Evidence Proposal
Design of social inventions: the case of “evidence” in health policy
We’re interested in evidence. A bit of a sociological history: evidence has been used as a means of improving research quality. Governments are interested in this.
New ideas in research management have a life cycle, starting off by being radical and then becoming routinised and absorbed.
At the moment, a big policy focus is evidence-based medicine, both as an aspiration and as the title of a particular approach to evidence. The question is whether the standardised system of which this is the title fully meets the aspirations of the ideal.
We plan to lay the foundations of a system analogous to the system for describing uncertainty already in use at the Dutch Environmental Agency (& NUSAP)
The analysis of different sorts of “evidence” in different fora. How do they relate? Are they compatible?
Jason to do: edit in Macquarie proposal
Schoder (?)
—
Deliverables
a practical instrument for describing evidence which is flexible … and disciplined … in order to help researchers and health policy decision makers to deploy the most approriate methodologies in every case. (RIVM as an example)
publications: two books and associated papers: — at least one major paper on the evidence tool — a book on the norms of evidence-based medicine, describing the tool inter alia — Jason’s book on statistical methodology
—
Related Issues - A Recursive Trap For Evaluation
—
useful phrases: - evidence out there in the real world - real people - the brute practice of evidence - “When it comes to philosophy I’m an engineer”
