首页> 外文期刊>JAMA: the Journal of the American Medical Association >Science, Politics, and Values The Politicization of Professional Practice Guidelines
【24h】

Science, Politics, and Values The Politicization of Professional Practice Guidelines

机译:科学,政治和价值观专业实践准则的政治化

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) issued updated clinical practice guidelines in 2006 for the diagnosis and treatment of Lyme disease.1 Within days, the Connecticut attorney general launched an investigation, alleging IDSA had violated state antitrust law by recommending against the use of long-term antibiotics to treat "chronic Lyme disease (CLD)," a label applied by advocates to a variety of nonspecific symptoms for which frequently no evidence suggests the etio-logic agent of Lyme disease is responsible. The IDSA was forced to settle the claim to avoid exorbitant litigation costs, even though the society's guidelines were based on sound science. The case exemplifies the politicization of health policy, with elected officials advocating for health policies against the weight of scientific evidence
机译:美国传染病学会(IDSA)于2006年发布了有关莱姆病诊断和治疗的最新临床实践指南。1康涅狄格州总检察长在几天之内展开了一项调查,指控IDSA违反了州反托拉斯法,建议不使用长期抗生素治疗“慢性莱姆病”(CLD),是提倡者针对各种非特异性症状使用的标签,通常没有证据表明莱姆病的病因是这种原因。即使该协会的指导方针是建立在可靠的科学基础上的,IDSA还是被迫解决了这一请求,以避免过高的诉讼费用。该案体现了卫生政策的政治化,民选官员倡导反对科学依据的卫生政策

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号