BACKGROUND: The challenges of evidence-informed decision-making in a public health emergency have never been so notable as during the COVID-19 pandemic. Questions about the decision-making process, including what forms of evidence were used, and how evidence informed-or did not inform-policy have been debated.
METHODS: We examined decision-makers\' observations on evidence-use in early COVID-19 policy-making in British Columbia (BC), Canada through a qualitative case study. From July 2021- January 2022, we conducted 18 semi-structured key informant interviews with BC elected officials, provincial and regional-level health officials, and civil society actors involved in the public health response. The questions focused on: (1) the use of evidence in policy-making; (2) the interface between researchers and policy-makers; and (3) key challenges perceived by respondents as barriers to applying evidence to COVID-19 policy decisions. Data were analyzed thematically, using a constant comparative method. Framework analysis was also employed to generate analytic insights across stakeholder perspectives.
RESULTS: Overall, while many actors\' impressions were that BC\'s early COVID-19 policy response was evidence-informed, an overarching theme was a lack of clarity and uncertainty as to what evidence was used and how it flowed into decision-making processes. Perspectives diverged on the relationship between \'government\' and public health expertise, and whether or not public health actors had an independent voice in articulating evidence to inform pandemic governance. Respondents perceived a lack of coordination and continuity across data sources, and a lack of explicit guidelines on evidence-use in the decision-making process, which resulted in a sense of fragmentation. The tension between the processes involved in research and the need for rapid decision-making was perceived as a barrier to using evidence to inform policy.
CONCLUSIONS: Areas to be considered in planning for future emergencies include: information flow between policy-makers and researchers, coordination of data collection and use, and transparency as to how decisions are made-all of which reflect a need to improve communication. Based on our findings, clear mechanisms and processes for channeling varied forms of evidence into decision-making need to be identified, and doing so will strengthen preparedness for future public health crises.

There is an overall scientific consensus that no new coal mines can be developed, if the Paris Agreement to limit global temperature rises is to be met. Yet in December 2022, following a lengthy Public Inquiry, the UK Government approved the development of Woodhouse Colliery in Cumbria. In doing so, it accepted the claim that the coal mine would be \'zero carbon\' and could even result in lower global emissions overall. As this paper demonstrates, there is no independent evidence to support these claims, whilst a large body of independent evidence comes to the opposite conclusion. This paper uses the example of Woodhouse Colliery to examine the use of evidence and expertise in climate governance processes. It finds that the nature of expertise and evidence is not properly considered, and that there is ambiguity and confusion surrounding the implementation of the UK\'s climate legislation, particularly the Climate Change Act. It also finds that the ways in which the decision-making process solicited and assessed evidence was flawed, promoting a \'false balance\'. This ambiguity and false balance provide scope for developers to argue the case for destructive developments, even while claiming adherence to climate ambitions. The paper concludes by suggesting reforms to governance processes, to provide a more transparent and credible implementation of policies to achieve the UK\'s net zero target. Suggested reforms include clearer rules governing fossil fuel phase-out; greater transparency and better handling of conflicts of interest in decision-making; and devolution of climate responsibilities to local areas.

The notion of \'evidence\' circulates in two realms of current maternity care: biomedical \'evidence-based\' obstetrics and efforts to reform conventional obstetric practices. I observed that in California\'s childbearing culture, \'evidence\' is a boundary object that allows diverse actors to engage in related conversations despite fundamentally different assumptions about what evidence is or does. Sometimes these actors form productive hybrids and other times they talk past one another. This article uses recent work from the history and philosophy of science to distinguish the biomedical use of evidence, which is based on controlled experiments to prove cause and effect, from reformists\' use of evidence, which foregrounds patient outcomes. Using Stengers\'s classification of doctors, charlatans, and curers, I discuss the role of rationality and experience in producing authoritative knowledge. Reformists\' use of evidence, in effect, challenges medical power dynamics on what they perceive to be the terms of medical authority itself; in doing so, it has the potential to fundamentally alter who is the primary beneficiary of medical protocols. The challenge is continuing to use evidence in a way that doesn\'t simply ossify a new set of norms, but becomes increasingly capacious, flexible, specific, and patient centered.

BACKGROUND: It is well documented that Canadian healthcare does not fully meet the health needs of First Nations, Inuit or Métis peoples. In 1996, the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples concluded that Indigenous peoples\' healthcare needs had to be met by strategies and systems that emerged from Indigenous worldviews and cultures. In 2015, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission also called on health organizations to learn from Indigenous \"knowledges\" and integrate Indigenous worldviews alongside biomedicine and other western ways of knowing. These calls have not yet been met. Meanwhile, the dynamic of organizational learning from knowledges and evidence within communities is poorly understood-particularly when learning is from communities whose ways of knowing differ from those of the organization. Through an exploration of organizational and health system learning, this study will explore how organizations learn from the Indigenous communities they serve and contribute to (re-)conceptualizing the learning organization and learning health system in a way that privileges Indigenous knowledges and ways of knowing.
METHODS: This study will employ a two-eyed seeing literature review and embedded multiple case study. The review, based on Indigenous and western approaches to reviewing and synthesizing knowledges, will inform understanding of health system learning from different ways of knowing. The multiple case study will examine learning by three distinct government organizations in Northwest Territories, a jurisdiction in northern Canada, that have roles to support community health and wellness: Tłı̨chǫ Government, Gwich\'in Tribal Council, and Government of Northwest Territories. Case study data will be collected via interviews, talking circles, and document analysis. A steering group, comprising Tłı̨chǫ and Gwich\'in Elders and representatives from each of the three partner organizations, will guide all aspects of the project.
CONCLUSIONS: Examining systems that create health disparities is an imperative for Canadian healthcare. In response, this study will help to identify and understand ways for organizations to learn from and respectfully apply knowledges and evidence held within Indigenous communities so that their health and wellness are supported. In this way, this study will help to guide health organizations in the listening and learning that is required to contribute to reconciliation in healthcare.

The scientifically founded surgical specialist discussion regarding the legal requirements for minimum volume numbers for diverse organ systems and selected surgical procedures as the basis of quality assurance and optimization of treatment is not new. Comprehensive and also reliable data from national and international studies are available for colorectal surgery, pancreatic surgery, esophageal surgery, liver surgery and gastric surgery. Recently, the raising of the minimum volume for complex esophageal interventions by the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA) in Germany from 10 up to 26 procedures per hospital and year, reignited the debate on this topic as well as the debate on centralization in the healthcare system in general. This decision seems to be scientifically well-justified from the perspective of political bodies and realizable in the practical implementation; however, from the perspective of physicians routinely involved in the corresponding highly complex procedures, there is a very much broader basis for discussion, which is only partially covered by a report of the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in the Healthcare System (IQWiG) as the foundation of the decision of the G‑BA. For the scientifically oriented surgical specialist society, in the first instance priority is given to the scientific evidence as the guiding principle. Nevertheless, aspects of the treatment reality cannot and should not be ignored. Therefore, the recommendations of the specialist society must be oriented not only to the quality of results but also to the realistic options for successful implementation in practice. Furthermore, questions of further education, the right of the patient to freedom of choice of the physician and preservation of the attractiveness of the occupational profile of surgeons are immanent topics for the surgical specialist society.
UNASSIGNED: Die wissenschaftlich begründete, fachchirurgische Diskussion um die gesetzliche Vorgabe von Mindesteingriffszahlen für diverse Organsysteme und ausgewählte operative Maßnahmen als Basis einer Qualitätssicherung und Versorgungsoptimierung ist nicht neu. Hierzu liegen umfangreiche und auch belastbare Daten aus nationalen und internationalen Studien für die kolorektale Chirurgie, die Pankreaschirurgie, die Ösophaguschirurgie, die Leberchirurgie und die Magenchirurgie vor. Jüngst hat die Anhebung der Mindestmenge für komplexe Eingriffe am Ösophagus durch den Gemeinsamen Bundesausschuss (G-BA) von 10 auf 26 pro Klinik und Jahr die Debatte um dieses Thema, aber auch die Debatte über die Zentralisierung im Gesundheitswesen im Generellen neu aufgerollt. Die Anhebung erscheint aus Sicht der politischen Gremien wissenschaftlich gut begründet und in der praktischen Umsetzung realisierbar. Aus Sicht der tagtäglich mit den entsprechenden hochkomplexen Entitäten vertrauten Ärzten ergibt sich allerdings eine sehr viel breitere Diskussionsgrundlage, welche nur partiell durch ein Gutachten des Instituts für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen (IQWiG) als Grundlage des G‑BA-Beschlusses abgedeckt wird. Für die wissenschaftlich orientierte chirurgische Fachgesellschaft steht dabei in erster Linie die wissenschaftliche Evidenz als Handlungsmaxime im Vordergrund. Gleichwohl können und dürfen Aspekte der Versorgungsrealität nicht ausgeblendet werden. Die Empfehlungen der Fachgesellschaft müssen sich somit neben der Ergebnisqualität auch an der praktischen Realisierbarkeit orientieren. Darüber hinaus sind Fragen der Weiterbildung, das Recht des Patienten auf freie Arztwahl sowie auch der Erhalt der Attraktivität des Berufsbildes Chirurg immanente Themen der chirurgischen Fachgesellschaft.

Poaching is one of the major types of wildlife crime in Russia. Remnants of goats (presumably the wild endemic species, the Caucasian tur) were found in an area of the Caucasian mountains. The case study involves a suspected poacher whose vehicle was found to have two duffel bags containing pieces of a carcass, which he claimed was that of a goat from his flock. The aim of the forensic genetic analysis for this case was to (i) establish individual identity and (ii) perform species identification. DNA typing based on fourteen microsatellites revealed that STR-genotypes generated from pieces of evidence found at crime scene fully matched those obtained from the evidence seized from the suspect. The results of genome-wide SNP-genotyping, using Illumina Goat SNP50 BeadChip, provided evidence that the poached animal was a wild Caucasian tur (Capra caucasica). Thus, based on comprehensive molecular genetic analysis, evidence of poaching was obtained and sent to local authorities. To our knowledge, this case study is the first to attempt to use DNA chips in wildlife forensics of ungulates.

How \'evidence\' is conceptualised, generated and deployed in meso-level policy implementation on the ground is critical to health delivery. Using the case of a large-scale health service reconfiguration in northwest England, this study began as a narrative investigation into how different data types and sources are prioritised as NHS administrative structures change over time. During the research, one unpopular reconfiguration decision, the downgrading of a hospital, was challenged using judicial review. Suddenly, a key decision was being based not upon \'facts and data\' type evidence but upon evidence of adherence to administrative procedure. This transferred focus away from the ever-shifting categories and hierarchies of data \'types\' towards an emphasis on process. By comparing two deliberative contexts-committee and judicial review-this article proposes that evidence can be understood as simultaneously entity and process. As health service reconfigurations continue in response to austerity, integration agendas, evolving organisational landscapes, and demographic and political change, it is increasingly important to recognise the different meanings and uses of evidence.

Alimentary tract duplications are rare congenital lesions, and only 2-8% of them are located in the stomach. Gastric duplications (GD) can lead to severe adverse events. Thus, surgical resection is required once the disease is diagnosed. The main purpose of this study is to describe the clinical features of gastric duplications and to provide evidence for the diagnosis and treatment.
A retrospective review of eight gastric duplications at two medical centers Peking University People\'s Hospital (PKUPH) and Shandong Provincial Hospital from 2010 to 2020 was conducted. Furthermore, the literature search was also conducted by retrieving data from PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases from the date of the database inception to January 15, 2021.
Eight patients who were diagnosed as gastric duplications and 311 published records were included in this study. In all, 319 patients were identified: Vomiting and abdominal pain were the most frequent clinical presentations among juveniles and adults respectively. There was no difference in gender distribution (F: 53.16% vs M: 46.84%), and the cystic gastric duplications were the most common type of the gastric duplications (87.04%). More than half (53.30%) of included cases were located in the greater curvature of stomach.
Gastric duplications could present with a wide spectrum of symptomatology, which might be misdiagnosed easily as other diseases. For cystic gastric duplications, the optimal treatment was a complete surgical removal. But conservative treatment might be an alternative strategy for tubular gastric duplications.

Many traditional and complementary and alternative healthcare systems or practices, such as Traditional Chinese Medicine, taijiquan, or acupuncture, are easily found in many North American and European cities. For the most part these practices are not accredited, and their validation remains limited. This is primarily the result of the lack of modern scientific research. Additionally, the studies that are performed rely on evidence and research designs that often negate the true features of these practices with a loss of authenticity. Is it possible or even desirable for these systems to acquire accreditation and inclusion? If so, given the apparent, subjective nature of these practices, can a pluralistic approach to healthcare that retains the Western values of science and medicine be developed that yet respects the diversity of different concepts about life, health and services while permitting these practices to maintain their authenticity? And is it possible to develop a regulatory framework that practitioners can use? The current paper examines questions concerning the uses of non-Western healthcare practices without the loss of their authentic nature. The process of integration is here examined using the inclusion of taijiquan as a health-promoting martial art as the model.

Although the impact of so-called \"sponsorship bias\" has been the subject of increased attention in the philosophy of science, what exactly constitutes its epistemic wrongness is still debated. In this paper, I will argue that neither evidential accounts nor social-epistemological accounts can fully account for the epistemic wrongness of sponsorship bias, but there are good reasons to prefer social-epistemological to evidential accounts. I will defend this claim by examining how both accounts deal with a paradigm case from medical epistemology, recently discussed in a paper by Bennett Holman. I will argue that evidential accounts cannot adequately capture cases of sponsorship bias that involve the manufacturing of certainty because of their neutrality with respect to the role of non-epistemic values in scientific practice. If my argument holds, it further highlights the importance of integrating social and ethical concerns into epistemological analysis, especially in applied contexts. One can only properly grasp sponsorship bias as an epistemological problem if one resists the methodological tendency to analyze social, ethical, and epistemological issues in isolation from each other.