Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27618222›Full record

ArticleMedical anthropology

Anthropologists in Global Health Experiments.

Anita Hardon, Robert Pool

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Medical anthropology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anita Hardona Department of Anthropology , University of Amsterdam , Netherlands.
Robert Poola Department of Anthropology , University of Amsterdam , Netherlands.
University of Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Can global health experiments be part of more flexible systems of knowledge generation, where different bodies of knowledge come together to provide understanding not only of the outcomes of new interventions but also of the mechanisms through which they affect people's well-being and health? Building past work in which they tried to transform how global health experiments are carried out and inspired by the articles in this special issue, the authors of this commentary argue that strategic collaboration is needed to break the hegemony of randomized controlled trials in designing global health technologies. More open-ended experiments are possible if anthropologists team up with innovative researchers in biomedicine to develop new conceptual models and to adopt novel observational techniques and 'smart' trials that incorporate ethnography to unravel complex interactions between local biologies, attributes of health systems, social infrastructures, and users' everyday lives.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchEvidence-Based MedicineGlobal HealthAnthropology, MedicalHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicethnographyEvidence based medicineexperimentsglobal health

Identifiers

PMID27618222
OpenAlexW2518868094

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.