The Public health as a transdisciplinary field

Authors

  • Edwin R. González Universidad de Antioquia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.rfnsp.212

Keywords:

public health, discipline, complexity, epistemology

Abstract

A recently published paper (“Public health as a scientific discipline: support for academic programs”) states that Ph. D. programs in public health must be based in consideration of public health as a scientific discipline because it has a defined object and also has support on a group of theories and methodological procedures to guide and to carry out its researches. That article contributed to promote reflections about this international debate. In this sense, the present paper also seeks to participate in the discussion concerning three fundamental ideas: 1) to insist that public health is more a transdisciplinary field than a scientific discipline, in which several disciplines converge giving it its theoretical and methodological basis (eg. epidemiology, administration, planning, etc); 2) to discuss the statement that “only a scientific discipline can provide the elements to systematically and creatively encompass realities which are very complex”, showing the limitations of the disciplinary paradigm and that complexity demands more comprehensive proposals;
3) to insist in the convenience of assuming public health as a transdisciplinary field of knowledge and practice and that the basis of this paradigm (a disciplinary epistemology) contribute to the discussion of some of the current questions related to the object of public health, thus becoming a challenge in terms of
an integral analysis that have become a necessity to face the problems of public health. Given the specific feature of the topic discussed and taking into account the limitations in the extension of this document, some historical aspects and definitions developed about public health will not be discussed, but comments will be
made when they are considered pertinent for the sake of its contribution in the described line.
|Abstract
= 1006 veces | PDF (ESPAÑOL (ESPAÑA))
= 364 veces|

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

(1). Cardona A, Franco A. La salud pública como disci-plina científica: fundamento para los programas de formación académica. Rev Fac Nac Salud Pública. 2005; 32(2):107-14.

(2). Duque R. Disciplinariedad, interdisciplinariedad, transdisciplinariedad: vínculos y límites. Rev Lec-tiva. 2004:135-51.

(3). Dogan M. Las nuevas ciencias sociales: grietas en las murallas de las disciplinas. [Sitio en Internet] dispo-nible en: http://firewall.unesco.org/issj/rics153/do-ganspa.html2; 2000.

(4). Max-Neef M. Fundamentos de la transdisciplinarie-dad. Revista Lectiva. 2004:105-18.

(5). Morin E. Sobre la interdisciplinariedad. Sociol Política. 1996; 4(8):17-27.

(6). Fourez G. La construcción del conocimiento cientí-fico. En: Duque R, ed. Disciplinariedad, interdisci-plinariedad, transdisciplinariedad: vínculos y límites. Rev Lectiva. 1994. p. 141.

(7). Frenk J. La nueva salud pública. En: La crisis de la salud pública: Reflexiones para el debate. Washing-ton, D. C: Organización Panamericana de la Salud; 1992. p. 75-93.

(8). Iriart C, Waitzkin H, Breilh J, Estrada A, Merhy E. Medicina social latinoaméricana: aportes y desafíos. Rev Panam Salud Pública. 2002;12:128-36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1020-49892002000800013

(9). Trad L. Seminario Internacional de Salud de Colec-tivos. 22 y 23 de abril. En: Desenvolvimiento del campo de la salud colectiva.; 2004. Bogotá: Univer-sidad Nacional de Colombia. 2004.

(10). Almeida N, Silva J. La crisis de la salud pública y el movimiento de la salud colectiva en Latinoamérica. Cuad Med Soc 1999;75:5-30.

(11). Franco S. Ética, universidad y salud. Memorias del Seminario “Marco conceptual para la formación de profesionales de la salud”. En: Proceso Vital Huma-no. Proceso salud/enfermedad: una nueva perspecti-va; 1993. Bogotá: Universidad Nacional de Colom-bia; 1993.

(12). Nájera E. La salud pública, una teoría para una prác-tica ¿Se precisa su reconstrucción? In: La crisis de la salud pública: Reflexiones para el debate. Was-hington, D. C: Organización Panamericana de la Salud; 1992. p. 123-32.

(13). Torres B, Escobar M, Yepes A, Toro C. Estado de la discución y de la práctica de la promoción de la salud en Colombia 1991-1999. Medellín, 2001. En: IX Congreso ALAMES; 2004 11-15 de agosto; Lima (Perú): Asociación Latinoamericana de Medi-cina Social; 2004.

(14). Granda E. La Salud Pública y las métaforas sobre la vida. Rev Fac Nac Salud Pública. 2000; 18:83-100.

(15). Breilh J. La epidemiología en el debate entre la salud pública convencional y la salud colectiva. En: Nuevos conceptos y técnicas de investigación. Qui-to: Centro de Estudios y Asesorías en salud (CEAS); 1994. p. 27-31.

(16). Cardona J. El concepto de salud, enfermedad y salud pública según los diferentes modos de produc-ción. Rev Centroaméricana Adm pública. 1988; 12:103-36.

(17). Silva J. La salud colectiva y los desafios de la prác-tica. En: La crisis de la salud pública: Reflexiones para el debate. Washington, D. C.: Organización Pa-namericana de la Salud; 1992. p. 151-67.

(18). Quevedo E. El tránsito desde la higiene hasta la salud pública en América Latina. En: Curso inter-nacional itinerante: La salud colectiva a las puertas del siglo XXI. Medellín: Universidad de Antioquia; 2000. p. 17-70.

(19). Breilh J. Epidemiología crítica: Ciencia emancipadora e intercultarilidad: Buenos Aires; 2003. p. 27-92.

(20). Terris M. Tendencias actuales en la salud pública de las Américas. En: La crisis de la salud pública: Reflexiones para el debate. Washington, D. C: Organi-zación Panamericana de la Salud; 1992. p. 185-204.

(21). Franco S. Teoría y práctica de la salud pública. Rev Fac Nac Salud Pública. 1993;12:63-76.

(22). Vásquez L. Aproximación al objeto de la salud pú-blica. Rev Fac Nac Salud Pública. 1993;12:9-25.

(23). Savitz D, Poole C, Miller W. Reassessing the role of epidemiology in public health. Am J Public Health. 1999;89(8):1158-61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.89.8.1158

(24). Organización Panamericana de la Salud. Capítulo 4: Fundamentos de la renovación conceptual. En: La Salud Pública en las Américas: nuevos conceptos, análisis de desempeño y bases para la acción. Washington, D. C.: OPS, Publicación Científica No. 589; 2002. p. 35-48.

(25). Franco A. La salud pública: ciencia en construcción. Rev Fac Nac Salud Pública. 2000; 17:41-55.

(26). Gómez R. La noción de “salud pública”: consecuencia de la polisemia. Rev Fac Nac Salud Pública. 2002; 20:101-16.

(27). Holm S. Does chaos theory have major implica-tion for philosophy of medicine? J Med Ethics 2002;28:78-81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/mh.28.2.78

(28). Martínez M. Transdisciplinariedad y lógica dialéc-tica. Un en foque para la complejidad del mundo actual. Rev Lectiva. 2004:119-34.

(29). Caponi S. Georges Canguilhem y el estatuto epistemológico del concepto de salud. Hist Cienc Saude. 1997; 4(2):287-307. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-59701997000200006

(30). Castellanos P. Los modelos explicativos del proceso salud-enfermedad: los determinantes sociales. En: Martínez F, Antó J, Castellanos P, Gili M, Marset P, Navarro V, ed. Salud Pública. Madrid: McGraw Hill Interamericana; 1998. p. 81-102.

Downloads

Published

2008-10-23

How to Cite

1.
González ER. The Public health as a transdisciplinary field. Rev. Fac. Nac. Salud Pública [Internet]. 2008 Oct. 23 [cited 2025 Feb. 8];25(1). Available from: https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/fnsp/article/view/212

Issue

Vol. 25 No. 1 (2007)

Section

Opinión

License

The contents of the articles are the responsibility of the authors

The editorial committee has editorial independence from the National School of Public Health "Héctor Abad Gómez" of the University of Antioquia.

The editorial committee is not responsible for aspects related to copying, plagiarism or fraud that may appear in the articles published in it.

When you are going to reproduce and disclose photographs or personal data in printed or digital format, informed consent is required. Therefore, this requirement is required of the author at the time of receipt of the manuscript.

Authors are responsible for obtaining the necessary permissions to reproduce any material protected by reproduction rights.

The authors preserve the moral rights and assign the economic rights that will correspond to the University of Antioquia, to publish it, distribute electronic copies, include them in indexing services, directories or national and international databases in Open Access, under the Creative Commons Attribution license -Not Commercial-Share Equal 4.0 International Commercial (CC BY-NC-SA) which allows others to distribute, remix, retouch, and create from the work in a non-commercial way, as long as the respective credit and license are granted. new creations under the same conditions.

The authors will sign the declaration of transfer of economic rights to the University of Antioquia, after the acceptance of the manuscript.

The editorial committee reserves the right to reject the articles whose authors do not offer satisfactory explanations about the contribution of each author, to meet the criteria of authorship in the submission letter. All authors must meet the four criteria of authorship according to ICMJE: "a) .- That there is a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the article or to the acquisition, analysis or interpretation of the data. b) That they have participated in the design of the research work or in the critical review of its intellectual content. c) .- That has been intervened in the approval of the final version that will be published.d). That they have the capacity to respond to all aspects of the article in order to ensure that issues related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are adequately investigated and resolved. "

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC