4.7 Article

Ethics, policy, and politics: A reply to Ashraf et al

期刊

SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE
卷 292, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114624

关键词

RCTs; Global health; Community health workers; Zambia

资金

  1. European Research Council's Horizon 2020 programme, project Universal Health Coverage
  2. Public Good in Africa: Anthropological and Historical Perspectives (`UNIVERSAL HEALTH', ERC-STG) [759820]
  3. European Research Council (ERC) [759820] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article responds to the commentary by Ashraf et al., defending the argument that their conducted RCT has caused harm in Zambia. It engages with their central points while also discussing the broader issue of the politics and ethics of conducting RCTs in countries in the Global South and the political vision of economists who see RCTs as a solution to poverty and global health problems.
In this reply to Ashraf et al.'s (2021) commentary, I defend my argument that the randomised control trial (RCT) conducted by Ashraf et al. has caused harm in Zambia. I engage with the central points made by Ashraf et al. (2021), but also discuss a broader issue that they chose not to address in their commentary: the politics and ethics of conducting RCTs in countries in the Global South and the political vision of economists who regard RCTs as a solution to poverty and global health problems.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据