作为科学思考的社会学

早在社会学诞生之初,其创始人孔德就将社会学确定为一门关于"社会的科学",称社会学为"实证的哲学".由于科学自身以及科学研究方法存在的局限性,这也意味着作为科学的社会学一系列问题的开始.正因如此,对于社会学的科学性含义,社会学实证方法的重要性,定量研究对于社会学理论发展的基础性意义等,有必要作进一步探讨.     

关于当前中国农村养老问题及其研究的思考

作为社会的一员 ,老年人有获得社会扶养的权利。如果这种权利不能实现或不能很好实现 ,便形成养老问题。养老问题的研究只能是以认识老年人获得社会保障权利实现过程中的问题并为之谋求对策为根本目的。从这个角度出发 ,养老问题应涵盖四个方面的内容 :(1)“谁来养”的问题 ;(2 )“养不养”的问题 ;(3)“怎么养”的问题 ;(4 )“养得怎么样”的问题。目前 ,这四个方面的问题在农村都存在。而此前的研究因被置于计划生育和老龄化等背景之下而显得不力及过于偏狭 :有限的研究集中于老龄化条件下农村老年人“谁来养”和“怎么养”的问题。这种状况不利于对农村养老问题的全面认识和解决。故笔者认为 ,今后应 (1)全面研究农村养老问题 ;(2 )重视现实 ,分清层次 ,切实研究急需解决的问题 ;(3)在社会变迁的视野下加强农村经济发展、社区建设、文化培育与养老关系的研究     

A measure of community members’ perceptions of the impacts of research partnerships in health and social services

Currently, there are no psychometrically sound outcome measures by which to assess the impacts of research partnerships. This article describes the development of a 33-item, survey questionnaire measuring community members’ perceptions of the impact of research partnerships addressing health or social issues. The Community Impacts of Research Oriented Partnerships (CIROP) was developed using information from the literatures on health promotion, community development, research utilization, and community-based participatory research, and from focus groups involving 29 key informants. Data from 174 community members were used to determine the factor structure, internal consistency, and test–retest reliability of the four CIROP scales, and to provide evidence of construct validity. The CIROP informs research partnerships about the extent of their impact in the areas of Personal Knowledge Development, Personal Research Skill Development, Organizational/Group Access To and Use of Information, and Community and Organizational Development, allowing them to demonstrate accountability to funding bodies. As well, the CIROP can be used as a research tool to assess the effectiveness of knowledge sharing approaches, determine the most influential activities of research partnerships, and determine structural characteristics of partnerships associated with various types of impact. The CIROP provides a better understanding of community members’ perspectives and expectations of research partnerships, with important implications for knowledge transfer and uptake.     

Both Whistleblowers and the Scientists They Accuse Are Vulnerable and Deserve Protection

Whistleblowers play an important role diagnosing research misconduct, but often experience severe negative consequences. That is also true for incorrectly accused scientists. Both categories are vulnerable and deserve protection. Whistleblowers must proceed carefully and cautiously. Anonymous whistleblowing should be discouraged but cannot be ignored when the allegations are specific, serious, and plausible. When accused of a breach of research integrity it is important to be as transparent as possible. Sometimes accusations are false in the sense that the accuser knows or should know that the allegations are untrue. A mala fide whistleblower typically does not act carefully and we postulate a typology that may help in detecting them. Striking the right balance between whistleblower protection and timely unmasking false and identifying incorrect accusations is a tough dilemma leaders of research institutions have to face.     

Developing a methodology to assess the impact of research grant funding: A mixed methods approach

This paper discusses the development of a mixed methods approach to analyse research funding. Research policy has taken on an increasingly prominent role in the broader political scene, where research is seen as a critical factor in maintaining and improving growth, welfare and international competitiveness. This has motivated growing emphasis on the impacts of science funding, and how funding can best be designed to promote socio-economic progress. Meeting these demands for impact assessment involves a number of complex issues that are difficult to fully address in a single study or in the design of a single methodology. However, they point to some general principles that can be explored in methodological design. We draw on a recent evaluation of the impacts of research grant funding, discussing both key issues in developing a methodology for the analysis and subsequent results. The case of research grant funding, involving a complex mix of direct and intermediate effects that contribute to the overall impact of funding on research performance, illustrates the value of a mixed methods approach to provide a more robust and complete analysis of policy impacts. Reflections on the strengths and weaknesses of the methodology are used to examine refinements for future work.     

Implementing Rigorous Survey Methodology within Contexts of Social Work Education,Training and Practice: A Case Study in Substance Use

With the integration of evidence-based practice central to all areas of social work education and training across the globe, it is crucial that we continue to engage with the methodological challenges inherent in gathering this evidence, particularly when it is related to the nature of social work education itself. As a result, this paper addresses some of the methodological challenges involved in examining the education available to social workers on engaging with substance use, both within the social work academy and local authorities in England. Drawing on experiences of implementing large scale online surveys from three substantial research projects completed by the authors, this paper highlights four methodological themes: (1) Constructing a representative sampling frame; (2) Identifying participants within organisations with many departments; (3) Response rates; and (4) Questionnaire design. While these are familiar methodological considerations, this article draws attention to the specific complexities of gathering ‘representative’ knowledge to inform educational strategies on substance use within social work education and employment contexts. Finally this paper offers lessons learned and guidance for social work academics, students and practitioners who are minded to build, or draw from, an evidence-base using representative samples from and within these environments.     

Whose Responsibility is it? A Call for the Integration of the Knowledge of Substance Misuse in Social Work Education,Practice and Research

This commentary is based on the review of two articles written by Hutchinson and Allnock (2014a; 2014b) presented in this journal issue. The commentary reviews the two articles and other research on the integration of substance misuse in social work education, practice and research. Four lessons are presented in terms of how to enhance the knowledge and skills around substance misuse by creating stronger links between social work education, practice and research.     

‘I'm not a family therapist. OK?’ Working Constructively with Families in Aged Psychiatry

This paper reports on the first phase of a larger study aimed at investigating factors hindering family work and exploring ways to improve the amount and quality of family contact within a community aged mental health service in Melbourne, Australia. During the first phase of the project, 28 mental health professionals were interviewed about their views and experiences. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analysed in terms of repeating themes. The range of attitudes, beliefs and feelings about family work is summarised in this paper. Polarities emerged around questions of whether or not to engage family members, and if so, what function family work fulfils. The interviews also provided useful information on clinicians' beliefs about what would increase the possibility of family work. The paper concludes with a discussion about how to recognize and value family work in this area and target sustainable interventions during the second phase of the study.     

Networking practitioner research: synthesising the state of the ‘art’

The aim of this paper is to examine what we know about the experience and outcomes of networked initiatives aimed at facilitating practitioner research. We outline the roles and significance of practitioner research within social work; review emerging understanding of practitioner research network initiatives; and draw conclusions from a comparative analysis of three such initiatives in Auckland, New Zealand, Arhus County, Denmark, and across Scotland. We consider the nature and challenges of practitioner research and a number of responses to how such work should be formulated and conducted. Central to our argument is an empirically informed consideration—from our separate and shared experiences—of how well networks enhance the process and consequences, and art and craft, of such research projects.     

血栓弹力图在PCI术后患者抗血小板治疗中的应用研究

目的:研究血栓弹力图在经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)患者中,使用血栓弹力图所测定的血小板抑制率的波动及临床疗效作用。方法:选取我院2012年1月份至2013年12月份收治的200例冠心病PCI治疗患者,应用血栓弹力图分析仪测定其二磷酸腺苷(ADP)途径诱导的血小板抑制率数据,根据抑制率差异分为3组,抑制率70%的为合格组,抑制率30%的为不合格组,入选不合格组再次分为2组,1组保持常规剂量治疗不变,另一组为大剂量治疗组。结果:随访半年的记录,记录一般情况及严重心脏不良事件发生情况。结果:随访的6个月中,共发生不良事件28例,其中合格组10例(9.6%),常规治疗组11例(22.4%),大剂量治疗组7例(14.9%),3组中不良事件发生率比常规治疗组大于大剂量治疗组,大剂量治疗组大于合格组,统计学上有明显差异(P0.05)。结论:血栓弹力图在PCI患者抗血小板治疗中应用具有一定的指导意义。