Anthropologists in Global Health Experiments

Hardon, Anita; Pool, Robert

doi:10.1080/01459740.2016.1177046

Cited by 12 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, the actual research process within anthropological practice is o en only cursorily described in published research, thus remaining implicit. Finally, medical anthropologists have portrayed themselves (and have been perceived as) a separate disciplinary community within global health research mainly 'collaborating with clinical researchers and epidemiologists' (Hardon and Pool 2016). From my personal experience, such disciplinary positioning is a defence against the dominant biomedically oriented organisational culture in many global health research institutes.…”

Section: The Position Of (Medical) Anthropology In the Current Globalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Arguably, ethnography would benefi t from a more open and transparent stance on how one reaches the 'why' via the 'how', to avoid the criticism of 'descriptive capture', certainly when one is combining a RCT with ethnography (Glaser 2001;Hardon and Pool 2016). In a policy environment still dominated by positivist perspectives, researchers need to ensure methodological rigour and be careful not to produce 'fake handbags' or diluted versions of the original methodology (Hanefeld 2016).…”

Section: Differences Similarities (And Weaknesses)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Global Health Research, Anthropology and Realist Enquiry

Belle

2019

Anthropology in Action

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, I set out to capture the dynamics of two streams within the field of global health research: realist research and medical anthropology. I critically discuss the development of methodology and practice in realist health research in low- and middle-income countries against the background of anthropological practice in global health to make claims on why realist enquiry has taken a high flight. I argue that in order to provide a contribution to today’s complex global issues, we need to adopt a pragmatic stance and move past disciplinary silos: both methodologies have the potential to be well-suited to an analysis of deep layers of context and of key social mechanisms.

show abstract

Section: The Position Of (Medical) Anthropology In the Current Globalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Differences Similarities (And Weaknesses)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Global Health Research, Anthropology and Realist Enquiry

Belle

2019

Anthropology in Action

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…'No one expected the MDGs to be such a success', Frenk told his audience. Crucially, the 'success' he referred to came about not because the MDG targets were achieved (most countries' attempts to meet them fell far short) but because they significantly changed the conversation and influenced health funding allocations by channelling funding toward the elimination of specific, targeted diseases such as HIV and malaria (see also Hardon & Blume 2005). The merging of health and economic development can be seen clearly in MGD Goal 1, which coupled the eradication of extreme poverty and the eradication of hunger, bringing the experience of bodily suffering squarely into dialogue with economic concerns.…”

Section: Transitions In 'Health'mentioning

confidence: 99%

Global Health

Yates‐Doerr¹,

Maes²

2019

CEA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Building on decades of research into medical practices, we use COVID-19 as an example to argue that more useful than the above metaphors is stating that different disciplines handle reality in different ways. [1][2][3] They draw on different techniques, address different concerns and operationalise their object of inquiry in different ways. They foster different paradigms.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%