医学认识论与经济学:如何(不)对全民基本收入研究进行分级

IF 1.7 3区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS Journal of Economic Methodology Pub Date : 2023-07-03 DOI:10.1080/1350178X.2023.2231480
K. Hayakawa, A. K. Yee
{"title":"医学认识论与经济学:如何(不)对全民基本收入研究进行分级","authors":"K. Hayakawa, A. K. Yee","doi":"10.1080/1350178X.2023.2231480","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT There have recently been novel applications of medical systematic review guidelines to economic policy interventions which contain controversial methodological assumptions that require further scrutiny. A landmark 2017 Cochrane review of unconditional cash transfer (UCT) studies, based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), exemplifies both the possibilities and limitations of applying medical systematic review guidelines to UCT and universal basic income (UBI) studies. Recognizing the need to upgrade GRADE to incorporate the differences between medical and policy interventions, the GRADE Public Health Project Group (PHPG) was convened to enumerate and address these methodological challenges. However, in light of our analysis of additional methodological challenges that arise for UCT and UBI studies, we argue that the adaptation of medical systematic review guidelines to economic methodology is far from straightforward and is in fact more challenging than claimed by the PHPG.","PeriodicalId":46507,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Methodology","volume":"52 1","pages":"245 - 264"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Medical epistemology meets economics: how (not) to GRADE universal basic income research\",\"authors\":\"K. Hayakawa, A. K. Yee\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1350178X.2023.2231480\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT There have recently been novel applications of medical systematic review guidelines to economic policy interventions which contain controversial methodological assumptions that require further scrutiny. A landmark 2017 Cochrane review of unconditional cash transfer (UCT) studies, based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), exemplifies both the possibilities and limitations of applying medical systematic review guidelines to UCT and universal basic income (UBI) studies. Recognizing the need to upgrade GRADE to incorporate the differences between medical and policy interventions, the GRADE Public Health Project Group (PHPG) was convened to enumerate and address these methodological challenges. However, in light of our analysis of additional methodological challenges that arise for UCT and UBI studies, we argue that the adaptation of medical systematic review guidelines to economic methodology is far from straightforward and is in fact more challenging than claimed by the PHPG.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46507,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Economic Methodology\",\"volume\":\"52 1\",\"pages\":\"245 - 264\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Economic Methodology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2023.2231480\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Economic Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2023.2231480","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

最近,医学系统评价指南在经济政策干预中的新应用包含有争议的方法假设,需要进一步审查。2017年一项具有里程碑意义的基于建议评估、发展和评估分级(GRADE)的无条件现金转移(UCT)研究的Cochrane综述,举例说明了将医学系统评价指南应用于无条件现金转移(UCT)和全民基本收入(UBI)研究的可能性和局限性。认识到需要升级GRADE,以纳入医疗干预和政策干预之间的差异,因此召集了GRADE公共卫生项目小组(PHPG),以列举和解决这些方法上的挑战。然而,根据我们对UCT和UBI研究中出现的其他方法学挑战的分析,我们认为,将医学系统评价指南适应经济方法学远非直截了当,实际上比PHPG所声称的更具挑战性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Medical epistemology meets economics: how (not) to GRADE universal basic income research
ABSTRACT There have recently been novel applications of medical systematic review guidelines to economic policy interventions which contain controversial methodological assumptions that require further scrutiny. A landmark 2017 Cochrane review of unconditional cash transfer (UCT) studies, based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), exemplifies both the possibilities and limitations of applying medical systematic review guidelines to UCT and universal basic income (UBI) studies. Recognizing the need to upgrade GRADE to incorporate the differences between medical and policy interventions, the GRADE Public Health Project Group (PHPG) was convened to enumerate and address these methodological challenges. However, in light of our analysis of additional methodological challenges that arise for UCT and UBI studies, we argue that the adaptation of medical systematic review guidelines to economic methodology is far from straightforward and is in fact more challenging than claimed by the PHPG.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: The Journal of Economic Methodology is a valuable forum which publishes the most current and exciting work in the broad field of economic methodology. The Journal of Economic Methodology addresses issues such as: ■Methodological analysis of the theory and practice of contemporary economics ■Analysis of the methodological implications of new developments in economic theory and practice ■The methodological writings and practice of earlier economic theorists (mainstream or heterodox) ■Research in the philosophical foundations of economics ■Studies in the rhetoric, sociology, or economics of economics
期刊最新文献
Economic methodology to preserve the past? Some reflections on economic theories and their dueling interpretations. Beyond uncertainty: reasoning with unknown possibilities (Elements in Decision Theory and Philosophy) Paternalism for rational agents Experimental approach to development economics: a review of issues and options Economic models and their flexible interpretations: a philosophy of science perspective
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1