Epistemic virtues and data-driven dreams: On sameness and difference in the epistemic cultures of data science and psychiatry.

Data science and psychiatry have diverse epistemic cultures that come together in data-driven initiatives (e.g., big data, machine learning). The literature on these initiatives seems to either downplay or overemphasize epistemic differences between the fields. In this paper, we study the convergence and divergence of the epistemic cultures of data science and psychiatry. This approach is more likely to capture where and how the cultures differ and gives insights into how practitioners from both fields find ways to work together despite their differences. We introduce the notions of "epistemic virtues" to focus on epistemic differences ethnographically, and "trading zones" to concentrate on how differences are negotiated. This leads us to the following research question: how are epistemic differences negotiated by data science and psychiatry practitioners in a hospital-based data-driven initiative? Our results are based on an ethnographic study in which we observed a Dutch psychiatric hospital department developing prediction models of patient outcomes based on machine learning techniques (September 2017 - February 2018). Many epistemic virtues needed to be negotiated, such as completeness or selectivity in data inclusion. These differences were traded locally and temporarily, stimulated by shared epistemic virtues (such as a systematic approach), boundary objects and socialization processes. Trading became difficult when virtues were too diverse, differences were enlarged by storytelling and parties did not have the time or capacity to learn about the other. In the discussion, we argue that our combined theoretical framework offers a fresh way to study how cooperation between diverse practitioners goes and where it can be improved. We make a call for bringing epistemic differences into the open as this makes a grounded discussion possible about the added value of data-driven initiatives and the role they can play in healthcare.

Políticas de avaliação e práticas de publicação nas Ciências da Saúde no Brasil / Políticas de evaluación y prácticas de publicación en las Ciencias de la Salud en Brasil / Health sciences evaluation policies and publication practices in Brazil

Estudos teóricos sustentam a existência de culturas epistêmicas nas comunidades acadêmicas, bem como a influência que as políticas de avaliação exercem sobre elas. Este trabalho aprofunda a análise realizada pelos autores em estudos anteriores para melhorar a compreensão de mudanças nas práticas de publicação das Ciências da Saúde no Brasil entre 2000 e 2014. Pesquisa quantitativa-qualitativa, não experimental e longitudinal. Os dados de produção científica das Ciências da Saúde são coletados a partir do Diretório dos Grupos de Pesquisa do Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico e são representadas graficamente as séries históricas de artigos, monografias e trabalhos completos em anais, bem como as razões de artigos nacionais/internacionais e artigos/monografias, para identificar e comparar padrões. Os documentos das Comissões de Áreas (Capes) e dos Comitês de Assessoramento das Ciências da Saúde (CNPq) são analisados, identificando, examinando e classificando os critérios de avaliação utilizados. Os resultados indicam que os critérios de avaliação contribuem a promover mudanças nas práticas de publicação dos pesquisadores das Ciências da Saúde, especificamente, um aumento significativo na contribuição percentual de artigos internacionais e uma redução dos nacionais, das monografias e dos trabalhos completo em anais(AU)

Estudios teóricos fundamentan la existencia de culturas epistémicas en las comunidades académicas, así como la influencia que las políticas de evaluación ejercen sobre ellas. El presente trabajo profundiza los análisis realizados por los autores en estudios anteriores para mejorar la comprensión sobre los cambios ocurridos en las prácticas de publicación de las Ciencias de la Salud en Brasil entre los años 2000 y 2014. Se trata de una investigación cuantitativa-cualitativa, no experimental y longitudinal. Se colectan los datos de la producción científica de las Ciencias de la Salud a partir del Directorio de Grupos de Investigación del Consejo Nacional de Asesoramiento Científico y Tecnológico, y se representan gráficamente las series históricas de artículos, monografías y trabajos en anales, así como las razones de artículos nacionales/internacionales y artículos/monografías, para identificar y comparar patrones. Se analizan los documentos de las Comisiones de Áreas (Capes) y de los Comités de Asesoramiento de las Ciencias de la Salud (CNPq), y se identifican, examinan y clasifican los criterios de evaluación utilizados. Los resultados indican que los criterios de evaluación contribuyen a promover cambios en las prácticas de publicación de los investigadores de las Ciencias de la Salud, específicamente un aumento significativo de la contribución porcentual de los artículos internacionales y una reducción de los nacionales, de las monografías y de los trabajos completos en anales(AU)

Theoretical studies substantiate the existence of epistemic cultures in academic communities, as well as the influence that evaluation policies exert upon them. The present study reviews the analyses conducted by authors of previous research to improve understanding of the changes taking place in health sciences publication practices in Brazil between the years 2000 and 2014. A longitudinal non-experimental quantitative-qualitative study was conducted. Data about health sciences scientific production were collected from the Research Groups Directory of the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development, and a graphic representation is provided of the historical series of papers, monographies and studies contained in annals, as well as of the ratios of national/international papers and papers/monographies, with the purpose of identifying and comparing the patterns. An analysis was performed of documents from the Area Committees (Capes) and the Health Sciences Advisory Committees (CNPq), identifying, examining and classifying the evaluation criteria used. Results suggest that evaluation criteria contribute to foster changes in the publication practices of health sciences researchers, particularly a significant increase in the percentage of international papers and a decrease in national papers, monographies and full papers in proceedings(AU)

Epistemic layers in development planning: A case study of the health sector in the Gunungkidul District, Indonesia.

The paper analyses how knowledge systems and epistemic cultures contribute to development planning through conduct of a microqualitative sociological case study of the health sector in Indonesia. The data were attained from 37 in-depth interviews and a stakeholder engagement workshop conducted in Gunungkidul, Yogyakarta, complemented with documentary media analysis. Our findings show that centralisation continues to exist in the development planning practice within the decentralisation era. This is shown through dependence on budget prescriptions and indicators from the centre in Jakarta. Further, this study demonstrates how the integration of indicators in the development planning process is hampered by myopic practices of government officials at the district level where there is evidence of an absence of verified knowledge in the Health Bureau of the District of Gunungkidul. Furthermore, there is dependence on data and information from volunteers in the Health Integrated Service Post (Posyandu) at the local village level. This study reveals, therefore, that development planning operates at three levels, yet with different knowledge systems and epistemic cultures at each level: central, district, and village.

Caracterización de las prácticas de publicación de las grandes áreas de conocimiento en Brasil / Characterization of publication practices of the broad disciplinaries areas of knowledge in Brazil

El objetivo del presente trabajo es caracterizar las prácticas de publicación de las grandes áreas del conocimiento en Brasil en el período 2000-2014. Se utilizaron los datos del Consejo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico sobre la producción científica de los investigadores brasileños: artículos nacionales e internacionales, libros, capítulos de libros y trabajos completos en anales de eventos. Se definieron las variables de análisis y se representaron gráficamente sus series históricas. La visualización de las series permitió identificar los canales predominantes: artículos nacionales, trabajos en anales y capítulos de libros en Ciencias Humanas, Sociales Aplicadas, Lingüística, Letras, Artes; artículos internacionales en Ciencias Exactas y de la Tierra, Agrarias, Biológicas y de la Salud; trabajos en anales en Ingeniería. Se corroboró la existencia de dos hiper-áreas: Humanidades (Ciencias Sociales Aplicadas, Humanas, Lingüística, Letras, Artes) y ciencias "duras" (Ingenierías, Ciencias Exactas y de la Tierra, Agrarias, Biológicas, Salud). En las primeras existe equilibrio entre la publicación de artículos, monografías y trabajos en anales y los artículos muestran una orientación predominantemente nacional. En las ciencias "duras" predomina la publicación de artículos si se comparan con otros tipos de documentos y los artículos tienen una orientación principalmente internacional. Se verifican cambios en las prácticas de publicación de las Ciencias Agrarias y de la Salud, áreas que pasaron de una orientación predominantemente nacional en la producción de artículos, para un equilibrio en la producción nacional e internacional. También se verifica un decrecimiento de la contribución de los trabajos en anales para la producción científica de las ciencias "duras"(AU)

The goal of this paper is to characterize the publication practices of the broad disciplinary areas of knowledge in Brazil during the 2000-2014 period. It was used the data of the National Council on Scientific and Technological Development on the scientific production of the Brazilian PhDs: national and international articles, books, book chapters and full papers in proceedings of scientific meetings. The analysis variables were defined, and their historical series were represented graphically. The series visualization allowed to identify the predominant communication channels: national articles, full papers in proceedings of scientific meetings and book chapters in Human Sciences, Applied Social Sciences and Linguistics, Letters and Arts; international articles in Exact and Earth Sciences, Agrarian, Biological and Health Sciences; full papers in proceedings of scientific meetings in Engineering. The existence of two hyper-areas was corroborated: Humanities (Applied Social Sciences, Human Sciences, Linguistics, Letters and Arts) and "hard" sciences (Engineering, Exact and Earth Sciences, Agrarian, Biological and Health Sciences). In the formers, there is a balance between the publication of articles, monographs and full papers in proceedings of scientific meetings, while articles show, predominantly, a national orientation. In the "hard" sciences the publication of articles predominates when compared with other types of documents and papers have, mainly, an international orientation. Changes in publishing practices of Agricultural and Health Sciences are verified, shifting from a predominantly national orientation in the production of articles to an equilibrium between national and international production. In "hard" sciences a decrease in the contribution of the full papers in proceedings of scientific meeting was also verified(AU)

Epistemic cultures in complementary medicine: knowledge-making in university departments of osteopathy and Chinese medicine.

There is increasing pressure on complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) to follow the evidence-based approach promoted in allied health and medicine, in which the randomised control trial represents the evidence gold standard. However, many CAM advocates see these methods as undermining the holism of CAM practice. This paper explores how such tensions are managed in CAM university departments - settings in which particular forms of knowledge and evidence are given 'official' imprimatur by CAM educators and researchers. By comparing two types of CAM, the paper also unpacks differences within this broad category, asking whether CAM academic disciplines comprise different 'epistemic cultures' (Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press). Interviews were conducted with 20 lecturers in Chinese medicine and osteopathy, across five Australian universities, and augmented with observation in two degree programs. Findings reveal contrasting ontological and epistemological perspectives between the two academic fields. Chinese medicine lecturers had largely adopted bioscientific models of research, typically conducting laboratory work and trials, although teaching included traditional theories. Osteopathy academics were more critical of dominant approaches and were focused on reframing notions of evidence to account for experiences, with some advocating qualitative research. The study illustrates CAM's 'epistemic disunity' while also highlighting the particular challenges facing academic CAM.