Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kasl, S. V
Right arrow Articles by Jones, B. A
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kasl, S. V
Right arrow Articles by Jones, B. A
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

International Journal of Epidemiology 2002;31:1094-1097
© International Epidemiological Association 2002

Editorial

Social epidemiology: towards a better understanding of the field

Stanislav V Kasl and Beth A Jones

Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Yale University School of Medicine, 60 College Street, PO Box 208034, New Haven, CT 06520-8034, USA.

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

In the February 2001 issue of the International Journal of Epidemiology the section on ‘Point-Counterpoint’ offered a one-page statement by Zielhuis and Kiemeney1 (Z&L) that was entitled ‘Social epidemiology? No way.’ Had this been submitted to the New England Journal of Medicine, such a statement would have been met with quiet editorial approval. But in this journal, with its marvellous tradition of publishing a broad range of epidemiological studies that investigate the role of a large array of biomedical, social, and psychological influences on health status, this opinion piece was met with considerable opposition, if not hostility.2–6 Zielhuis and Kiemeney argued that the essence of epidemiology resides in its biomedical approach to aetiology. Here, the behavioural and social sciences have no contribution to make, though they can participate in descriptive epidemiological studies (‘frequency research‘). This extremely narrow, reductionistic perspective on the work of epidemiologists precludes the study of the . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Int J EpidemiolHome page
J. Cwikel
Take a walk on the wild side of social epidemiology
Int. J. Epidemiol., June 1, 2008; 37(3): 683 - 684.
[Full Text] [PDF]