• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >A Delphi Technology Foresight Study: Mapping Social Construction of Scientific Evidence on Metagenomics Tests for Water Safety
【2h】

A Delphi Technology Foresight Study: Mapping Social Construction of Scientific Evidence on Metagenomics Tests for Water Safety

机译：Delphi技术前瞻性研究：绘制关于水安全性的元基因组学测试的科学证据的社会建构图

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务，本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文，但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁，仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况，如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Access to clean water is a grand challenge in the 21st century. Water safety testing for pathogens currently depends on surrogate measures such as fecal indicator bacteria (e.g., E. coli). Metagenomics concerns high-throughput, culture-independent, unbiased shotgun sequencing of DNA from environmental samples that might transform water safety by detecting waterborne pathogens directly instead of their surrogates. Yet emerging innovations such as metagenomics are often fiercely contested. Innovations are subject to shaping/construction not only by technology but also social systems/values in which they are embedded, such as experts’ attitudes towards new scientific evidence. We conducted a classic three-round Delphi survey, comprised of 107 questions. A multidisciplinary expert panel (n = 24) representing the continuum of discovery scientists and policymakers evaluated the emergence of metagenomics tests. To the best of our knowledge, we report here the first Delphi foresight study of experts’ attitudes on (1) the top 10 priority evidentiary criteria for adoption of metagenomics tests for water safety, (2) the specific issues critical to governance of metagenomics innovation trajectory where there is consensus or dissensus among experts, (3) the anticipated time lapse from discovery to practice of metagenomics tests, and (4) the role and timing of public engagement in development of metagenomics tests. The ability of a test to distinguish between harmful and benign waterborne organisms, analytical/clinical sensitivity, and reproducibility were the top three evidentiary criteria for adoption of metagenomics. Experts agree that metagenomic testing will provide novel information but there is dissensus on whether metagenomics will replace the current water safety testing methods or impact the public health end points (e.g., reduction in boil water advisories). Interestingly, experts view the publics relevant in a “downstream capacity” for adoption of metagenomics rather than a co-productionist role at the “upstream” scientific design stage of metagenomics tests. In summary, these findings offer strategic foresight to govern metagenomics innovations symmetrically: by identifying areas where acceleration (e.g., consensus areas) and deceleration/reconsideration (e.g., dissensus areas) of the innovation trajectory might be warranted. Additionally, we show how scientific evidence is subject to potential social construction by experts’ value systems and the need for greater upstream public engagement on metagenomics innovations.
机译：在21世纪，获得洁净水是一个巨大的挑战。当前，对病原体的水安全性测试取决于诸如粪便指示细菌（例如大肠杆菌）之类的替代措施。元基因组学涉及环境样品中DNA的高通量，与培养无关的，无偏倚的shot弹枪测序，这可能通过直接检测水生病原体而不是其替代物来改变水安全。然而，诸如宏基因组学之类的新兴创新经常遭到激烈竞争。创新不仅受到技术的塑造/建构，而且受其嵌入的社会系统/价值的塑造，例如专家对新科学证据的态度。我们进行了一次经典的三轮Delphi调查，包括107个问题。代表发现科学家和政策制定者的连续性的跨学科专家小组（n = 24）评估了宏基因组学测试的出现。据我们所知，我们在此报告了专家对以下问题的第一项德尔福前瞻性研究：（1）通过水安全性进行宏基因组学测试的十大优先证据标准；（2）对宏基因组学创新的管理至关重要的特定问题专家之间达成共识或意见分歧的轨迹；（3）从发现到进行宏基因组学测试的预计时间；以及（4）公众参与宏基因组学测试开发的作用和时机。测试区分有害和良性水性生物的能力，分析/临床敏感性和可重复性是采用宏基因组学的三大证据标准。专家一致认为，宏基因组学测试将提供新颖的信息，但是对于宏基因组学是否将取代当前的水安全测试方法或影响公共卫生终点（例如减少煮沸水建议）存在分歧。有趣的是，专家认为公众在宏基因组学测试的“上游”科学设计阶段采用宏基因组学是“下游能力”，而不是共同生产者。总而言之，这些发现为对称地进行宏基因组学创新提供了战略前瞻：通过确定可以保证创新轨迹加速（例如共识区域）和减速/重新考虑（例如异议区域）的区域。此外，我们展示了科学证据如何通过专家的价值体系受到潜在的社会建设的影响，以及需要更大的上游公众参与宏基因组学创新的需求。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号