医学美学与人文医学的不解之缘

在阐明我国医学美学学科于20世纪80年代发端于人文医学的基础上,介绍了20多年来,医学美学在当代中国美容医学整体学科形成和发展中起到的理论导向作用,同时促进了自身的发展,进而伴随着美容医学学科走向世界,影响世界,取得了学科理念上的国际共识而领先于世界.最后,阐明了医学美学和美容医学学科两者都进入成熟阶段之后,必将 分别回归于应用医学和人文医学两个不同的医学领域.     

人文走进医学究竟路有多长?——医学伦理与医学关系视角的讨论

人文与医学的渐远和分离是生命科学与技术进步过程中的一种必然现象.医学的人文性是医学的本质规定性,人文走进医学本质上是一种相互完成回归的过程.医学道德与医学的关系是人文与医学关系的一个缩影.两者在特定历史阶段的分离,使它们从浑然一体分化为不同学科,如今的回归并非学科重归医学,而是医学道德回归家园.在社会与科学发展的大背景下,寻求回归之路成为可能,但受到多种条件限制,回归之路定很漫长.     

循证烧伤医学与烧伤医学的发展

循证医学是以证据为基础的医学,其在烧伤医学的应用即为循证烧伤医学.循证医学主要实施策略是发现和提出问题;寻求烧伤医疗实践中或者文献中的有价值证据;进行实验或方法学的评价;应用于临床检验的实践中;评价实践结果.循证烧伤医学和循证医学对烧伤医学的学科发展和临床工作的开展具有重要的意义,烧伤医学今后的发展方向是循证烧伤医学.     

医学语言学的两种界定

对医学语言学目前存在两种界定的方法,于是就形成了研究范围和功能任务完全不同的两种学科.它们同名称,但分别属于医学软科学和应用语言学,前者是研究语言的医学现象,后者是研究医学的语言现象,学科特点有很大的区别.但是,两门学科都是未来医学发展中应用价值很高的学科.     

医学哲学研究纲要

医学哲学作为科学技术哲学的一个分支学科,伴随着上世纪后50年医学科学的发展,特别是生物技术的迅速进步,其内容有了很大的扩展.当今,医学已经向哲学发出了呼唤.本研究纲要旨在从过去20多年国内外医学哲学的实际出发,为医学哲学的研究领域划出一个基本轮廓,以促进我国医学哲学的繁荣、医学人才的成长和医学科学的发展.     

美学观念在当代中国医学领域里的三次“飞跃”——当代中国美容医学整体学科的发展

探寻医学美学与美容医学整体学科在我国形成与发展的历程,总结了近30年来美学观念在我国医学领域的三次“飞跃”:从学科的孕育到学术组织的建立;国内整体学科建设的成功;学会和学科成功迈步世界.明确了我国美容医学已经迎来进一步向世界作出贡献的新机遇.     

关于医学整合的几点认识

医学整合对医学发展整体趋势的回应;医学专业学科的整合,临床与预防、公共卫生的整合,保健服务与全民健康促进的整合,医学教育与保健服务的整合,医学人文与医学的整合,是当前是最为迫切的整合;构建新的保健服务体系,实现保健服务的公平,是医学整合的核心;医学整合是创新,也是革命.     

医学人文学的历史与现状

追溯了美国医学人文学发展的历史原因,分析了医学人文学先驱们的思想,回顾了医学人文学各子学科发展的历史,认为医学人文学有如此发展是历史的必然.同时美国宾州州立大学和印第安纳大学为例,介绍了医学人文学的教育模式.     

整合:医学创新思维的重要形式

医学整合,不仅是一种创新行为,也是一种创新思维形式.医学创新思维整合形式的特征是相关思维材料合理迁移、相关思维方式的耦合.医学创新思维是理性思维,迷信灵感和直觉而忽略逻辑是危险的.需要逻辑思维和非逻辑思维的整合;医学创新思雏是复杂性思维,强调批判而否定传承是片面的.需要批判性思维和经验性思维的整合.医学整合,不仅可以从本体论层面予以理解,还可以从方法论层面予以运用.医学创新思维整合形式的研究需要整合理念的方法论引导.     

医学发展中的整体观念与学科综合

以器官为中心的"器官医学"忽略了人的整体性.随着医学模式的转变,以器官为研究重点的单个学科因其自身的劣势,已越来越不适应医学的发展.在疾病诊治中的对整体观念的要求更加突出,要以疾病为中心转向以病人为中心.注重整体观念和新的学科模式即学科综合将是医学发展的必由之路.     

仿生学在移植免疫研究中的应用

世界正在进入仿生学时代。在生命科学领域中进行仿真学研究,将极大地促进人类对生命现象的认知,并揭示其普遍规律。运用仿生学原理在天然模型面前扬其利,避其害,将为科学工作者提供一个崭新的科研思维平台。从仿生角度洞悉并破解移植免疫奥秘将是一个具有广阔前景的创新源泉。     

对临床科学研究存在的问题的思考

学风浮躁、急功近利、弄虚作假,困扰着临床医学研究,影响着临床医学的创新和发展。这不仅与当前的科技评价、管理制度有关,更与科研工作与领导的政绩、业绩有关。遵循科学研究的自然规律,让学术回归学术,建立同行评议制度,恢复学者的诚信,是临床医学研究创新发展的前提。同时,结合医院的分级管理,临床医学研究也应分类管理。     

The Cross‐Level Mediating Effect of Psychological Capital on the Organizational Innovation Climate–Employee Innovative Behavior Relationship

Organizational innovation climates have been found to be effective predictors of employee creativity and organizational innovation. As such, climate assessments provide a basis for useful organizational interventions in enhancing creativity and innovation. Researchers now call for better articulation of the motivational mechanisms that link social context to employee innovation. In responding to the above call, this study found that employee positive psychological capital (PsyCap) is more influential than organizational innovation climate on employee innovative behavior. With a large sample (N  = 781) from 16 organizations and a cross‐level analysis, we examined the relationship between organizational innovation climate and employee innovative behavior with employee PsyCap as mediator. The results showed that both organizational innovation climate and employee PsyCap significantly affect employee innovative behavior, and more importantly, employee PsyCap fully mediates this relationship. The innovation journey is a challenging and risky one with many frustrations and discouraging moments from idea generation to idea implementation. The research results presented here imply that to be innovatively effective, organizations are advised to manage both social (organizational innovation climate) and psychological (PsyCap) resources of employees in enhancing employee innovative behavior. Other theoretic and practical implications are discussed.     

高压氧医学与康复医学的协同发展

随着医学理论与实践的不断创新和发展,中国也正在努力寻求一种具有中国特色的现代医学发展模式.高压氧医学与康复医学都是新兴的边缘交叉性学科,具有广阔的发展潜能和空间;然而,两者在快速发展的同时也突显了一些问题,如：后续动力不足、发展方向不明确等.本文从哲学中联系与发展的角度出发,通过机制探讨及发展趋势的分析,试图寻找两者共同发展的结合点,为推动康复医学与高压氧医学在临床工作中的继续向前发展提供一种借鉴与参考.     

Necessity (not just novelty) is the mother of invention: using creativity research to improve research in work and organizational psychology

In this essay, we discuss reasons that work and organizational psychology does not live up to its self-declared mission of being an applied science in the service of improving both people’s quality of working life and organizational effectiveness. We use fundamentals of research on creativity and innovation as a lens through which we can view problems and possible solutions to these problems. In particular, we stress that innovation entails not only new, but also useful insights, that innovation requires “rewarding failure”, and that innovation feeds off of team diversity. We provide suggestions for how the definition of theoretical and empirical contributions of research, reward systems, and collaboration practices could be changed to foster innovative research that helps people thrive at work.     

转化医学——医学基础研究与临床应用间的桥梁

当前医学发展进程中,医学基础研究进展迅速,而临床医学则相对滞后。究其原因,大量基础研究成果不能及时有效地用于临床,使二者间产生了巨大的鸿沟。转化医学搭建了沟通二者的桥梁,为促进医学基础研究向临床的应用,同时为针对临床需要提出基础研究方向提供了有效途径。     

“Just Carbon”: Ideas About Graphene Risks by Graphene Researchers and Innovation Advisors

Graphene is a nanomaterial with many promising and innovative applications, yet early studies indicate that graphene may pose risks to humans and the environment. According to ideas of responsible research and innovation, all relevant actors should strive to reduce risks related to technological innovations. Through semi-structured interviews, we investigated the idea of graphene as a risk (or not) held by two types of key actors: graphene researchers and innovation advisors at universities, where the latter are facilitating the movement of graphene from the laboratory to the marketplace. The most common idea found is that graphene is not a risk due to, e.g., low toxicity, low amounts produced/used, and its similarity to harmless materials (being “just carbon”). However, some researchers and advisors also say that graphene is a risk, e.g., under certain conditions or due to a lack of risk-related information. We explain the co-existence of these seemingly contradictory ideas through (1) the semantic ambiguity of the word risk and (2) a risk/no-risk rhetoric, where risks are mentioned rhetorically only to be disregarded as manageable or negligible. We suggest that some of the ideas held by the researchers and innovation advisors constitute a challenge to responsible research and innovation regarding graphene. At the same time, we acknowledge the dilemma that the discourse of responsible innovation creates for the actors: denying graphene risks makes them irresponsible due to a lack of risk awareness, while affirming graphene risks makes them irresponsible due to their everyday engagement in graphene development. We therefore recommend more research into what researchers and innovation advisors should do in practice in order to qualify as responsible.     

Twelve steps to heaven: Successfully managing change through developing innovative teams

In this article we propose that work teams implement many of the innovative changes required to enable organizations to respond appropriately to the external environment. We describe how, using an input?–?process?–?output model, we can identify the key elements necessary for developing team innovation. We propose that it is the implementation of ideas rather than their development that is crucial for enabling organizational change. Drawing on theory and relevant research, 12 steps to developing innovative teams are described covering key aspects of the team task, team composition, organizational context, and team processes.     

论医学哲学范畴

医学哲学范畴是医学哲学理论体系中最基本和最深刻的概念,是人们把握生命和健康问题的认识纲领,是对医学问题进行逻辑归类的思维形式。医学哲学范畴是哲学与医学之间多重学术关系的统一,是抽象性与具体性、普遍性与特殊性、稳定性与变易性的结合,体现了学术价值、实践价值和文化价值的等多重价值。医学哲学范畴研究以创新研究为灵魂,以基础研究为根本,以应用研究为标的。     

Global Diversification in Medicine Regulation: Insights from Regenerative Stem Cell Medicine

ABSTRACT

Medicine regulation worldwide has undergone a process of regulatory diversification. The evidence-based medicine (EBM) paradigm, centered on multi-phase randomized controlled trials, is increasingly contested and replaced by new models of clinical validation. To explain these changes, STS research has cited just a few factors, e.g. growing pressure form health consumers; the role of pharmaceutical companies to lobby for fast, affordable drug development; the influence of neoliberal ideas and libertarian advocacy of deregulation; and the agency of national governments to enable domestic innovation opportunities in the context of global competition and inequalities. Those factors individually cannot account for the increasing variation in medicine regulation at both national and global levels. Instead it is helpful to integrate elements of existing explanations into a framework with four pairs of conflicting regulatory choices, which play a central role in the formation of medicine regulation. We use this framework to compare regulatory changes in the USA, European Union, China, India, Argentina, and Japan. Across these jurisdictions, the case studies illustrate four dynamics of diversification. Key regulatory concepts such as evidence, risk, safety, efficacy, responsibility and accountability acquire different meanings, reshaping medicine innovation in far-reaching and often contradictory ways. The boundaries between medical research and healthcare provision, commerce and humanitarian service, as well as state control and medical self-regulation are re-defined.