Has Epidemiology Become Infatuated With Methods? A Historical Perspective on the Place of Methods During the Classical (1945–1965) Phase of Epidemiology

Abstract

Before World War II, epidemiology was a small discipline, practiced by a handful of people working mostly in the United Kingdom and in the United States. Today it is practiced by tens of thousands of people on all continents. Between 1945 and1965, during what is known as its "classical" phase, epidemiology became recognized as a major academic discipline in medicine and public health. On the basis of a review of the historical evidence, this article examines to which extent classical epidemiology has been a golden age of an action-driven, problem-solving science, in which epidemiologists were less concerned with the sophistication of their methods than with the societal consequences of their work. It also discusses whether the paucity of methods stymied or boosted classical epidemiology's ability to convince political and financial agencies about the need to intervene in order to improve the health of the people.

Critical epidemiology in action: Research for and by indigenous peoples

“…Credibility in epidemiology accrues in part through the profession’s visible (and often vigorous) discussions of statistical methodologies, much of which concern how to reduce bias and misclassification, control for confounding, and rectify other potential sources of error ( Morabia, 2015 ). Work for and by indigenous peoples engages directly in these discussions.…”

Epidemiology at a time for unity

“…For each of these domains, each axiom is relevant. The methodological advancement of causal inference arose out of a gap in our approach to asking causal questions 52 and has led to clearer questions 17,32,53 as well as 'deconstructing' some of the previously observed paradoxes. 54 Descriptive research investigates how the health states are distributed across a population (i.e.…”

Pandemics and methodological developments in epidemiology history

“…Thus, with hindsight, we can appreciate that the 1918 pandemic may have spurred the emergence of an academic parallel to the public service dedicated to public health and epidemiology. The later development of an epidemiologic corpus of methods and concepts mostly came from these schools of public health and academic epidemiology [16].…”