RESUMO
In this article, we engage in a dialogue about structural competencies based on the proposal of the classroom-workshop, aimed at educational and work environments in the fields of health and education. Our starting point is the notion that practical experiences do not merely represent a collection of specialised technical knowledge, as they are part of the complexity of the social game. Drawing from the theoretical frameworks of Pierce, Gadamer, Freire, and others, the proposal of the classroom-workshop recovers the power of collective praxis. Learning from and with others becomes central in the social game in order to collectively appropriate knowledge by making the autonomy of learning as horizontal as possible. By centering the relational world of learning and working, the classroom-workshop recovers the circular structure of understanding that enables a reflective appropriation of the territory - understood as the social space where life takes place - while de-instrumentalizing the reading of theoretical traditions and resignifiying the practice of writing. It establishes connections, links, and anchors that enable a dialogue between theory and practice, so often dissociated and fragmented.
Assuntos
Meio Social , Humanos , EscolaridadeRESUMO
In the definition of health policies and decision-making on the part of health officials, there is often a prevailing separation between clinical practice, epidemiology, and public health. Although this division is naturalized from the viewpoint of hospitals and public agencies, it is artificial in the context of concrete territories and communities, where problems are not structured according to the fragmentation of knowledge, but rather express the complexities of the problems faced by individuals and population groups. In this context, this article compiles and analyzes studies on the ecology of medical care carried out between 1928 and 2018 that have revisited the pioneering study "The ecology of medical care" by White, Williams and Greenberg. The discussion is structured around three central issues: 1) recurrent themes in studies on the ecology of medical care; 2) health information systems and health surveys; and 3) the institutional hegemony of hospitals in the health field.
En la definición de las políticas de salud y en la toma de decisiones por parte de la gestión suele primar una separación entre clínica, epidemiología y salud pública, situación naturalizada desde la mirada de los hospitales y ministerios, pero artificial en los territorios, donde los problemas no se estructuran siguiendo la fragmentación de saberes, sino que se expresan en la complejidad de los problemas de las personas y los conjuntos poblacionales. Desde esa concepción, este trabajo recopila y analiza los estudios de ecología de la atención médica, realizados entre 1928 y 2018, que retoman el estudio precursor "The ecology of medical care", de White, Williams y Greenberg, para centrar la discusión en tres ejes: 1) las regularidades presentes en los estudios de ecología de la atención médica, independientemente del año y el país; 2) los sistemas de información en salud y las encuestas de salud; y 3) la hegemonía institucional del hospital en el campo de la salud.
Assuntos
Hospitais , Saúde Pública , Humanos , Política de SaúdeRESUMO
RESUMEN En la definición de las políticas de salud y en la toma de decisiones por parte de la gestión suele primar una separación entre clínica, epidemiología y salud pública, situación naturalizada desde la mirada de los hospitales y ministerios, pero artificial en los territorios, donde los problemas no se estructuran siguiendo la fragmentación de saberes, sino que se expresan en la complejidad de los problemas de las personas y los conjuntos poblacionales. Desde esa concepción, este trabajo recopila y analiza los estudios de ecología de la atención médica, realizados entre 1928 y 2018, que retoman el estudio precursor "The ecology of medical care", de White, Williams y Greenberg, para centrar la discusión en tres ejes: 1) las regularidades presentes en los estudios de ecología de la atención médica, independientemente del año y el país; 2) los sistemas de información en salud y las encuestas de salud; y 3) la hegemonía institucional del hospital en el campo de la salud.
ABSTRACT In the definition of health policies and decision-making on the part of health officials, there is often a prevailing separation between clinical practice, epidemiology, and public health. Although this division is naturalized from the viewpoint of hospitals and public agencies, it is artificial in the context of concrete territories and communities, where problems are not structured according to the fragmentation of knowledge, but rather express the complexities of the problems faced by individuals and population groups. In this context, this article compiles and analyzes studies on the ecology of medical care carried out between 1928 and 2018 that have revisited the pioneering study "The ecology of medical care" by White, Williams and Greenberg. The discussion is structured around three central issues: 1) recurrent themes in studies on the ecology of medical care; 2) health information systems and health surveys; and 3) the institutional hegemony of hospitals in the health field.
RESUMO
RESUMEN Esta entrevista forma parte de una serie de diálogos que Salud Colectiva viene organizando con diversos editores de referencia, que tienen como propósito abordar las dificultades similares por las que atraviesan las revistas latinoamericanas y las diversas formas de resolver esas dificultades, las cuales pueden ser un punto de partida para encontrar soluciones contextualizadas. En esta entrevista realizada en 2015, en el Instituto de Salud Colectiva de la Universidad Nacional de Lanús, Maria Cecília de Souza Minayo nos habla del contexto de surgimiento de la revista Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, de las disputas políticas dentro del campo de la salud colectiva, y de la relevancia del debate como proceso de constitución de la propia ciencia. Además, analiza la importancia del financiamiento para el crecimiento de una revista, y los problemas y las dificultades para obtenerlo, lo que expresaría la falta de una política brasileña de publicación científica.
ABSTRACT This interview forms part of a series of dialogues that Salud Colectiva has been holding with key editors in the field, with the purpose of examining the similar difficulties confronted by Latin American journals and the diverse ways the journals have faced these difficulties as a likely starting point for uncovering contextualized solutions. In this interview, carried out in 2015 in the Instituto de Salud Colectiva of the Universidad Nacional de Lanús, Maria Cecília de Souza Minayo speaks to us about the context in which the journal Ciência & Saúde Coletiva emerged, the political disputes existing within the collective health field, and the relevance of debate as a constitutive process of science itself. Additionally, Minayo analyzes both the importance of funding to the growth of a journal and the problems and difficulties in obtaining funds, which puts into evidence the lack of policy regarding scientific publishing in Brazil.
Assuntos
Humanos , Publicações Periódicas como Assunto , Editoração , Saúde Pública , Brasil , Dissidências e DisputasRESUMO
RESUMEN Este texto es parte de una serie de entrevistas cuyo propósito es relevar diversas experiencias editoriales y las dificultades similares por las que atraviesan las revistas latinoamericanas, de manera de comenzar a encontrar soluciones contextualizadas que permitan articular esfuerzos aislados. En esta entrevista realizada en julio de 2015, en el Instituto de Salud Colectiva de la Universidad Nacional de Lanús, Carlos Augusto Monteiro nos habla del modelo de financiamiento, el proceso de trabajo, las innovaciones técnicas, la conformación de equipos y sus roles. Asimismo, analiza la relevancia de las revistas latinoamericanas para la difusión de investigaciones de interés de la agenda nacional, y el vínculo entre el desempeño de las revistas, la calidad de los posgrados y las investigaciones.
ABSTRACT This text is part of a series of interviews that seek to explore diverse editing and publication experiences and the similar difficulties Latin America journals face, in order to begin to encounter contextualized solutions that articulate previously isolated efforts. In this interview, carried out in July 2015 in the Instituto de Salud Colectiva [Institute of Collective Health] of the Universidad Nacional de Lanús, Carlos Augusto Monteiro speaks to us about funding, work processes, technological innovations, and establishing teams and roles. He analyzes the importance of Latin American journals as a platform for spreading research relevant to national agendas, and the connection between journal performance, the quality of graduate training programs and research quality.
Assuntos
Humanos , Publicações Periódicas como Assunto , Editoração , Academias e Institutos , América LatinaRESUMO
This text is part of a series of interviews that seek to explore diverse editing and publication experiences and the similar difficulties Latin America journals face, in order to begin to encounter contextualized solutions that articulate previously isolated efforts. In this interview, carried out in July 2015 in the Instituto de Salud Colectiva [Institute of Collective Health] of the Universidad Nacional de Lanús, Carlos Augusto Monteiro speaks to us about funding, work processes, technological innovations, and establishing teams and roles. He analyzes the importance of Latin American journals as a platform for spreading research relevant to national agendas, and the connection between journal performance, the quality of graduate training programs and research quality.
Assuntos
Academias e Institutos , Publicações Periódicas como Assunto , Editoração , Humanos , América LatinaRESUMO
This interview forms part of a series of dialogues that Salud Colectiva has been holding with key editors in the field, with the purpose of examining the similar difficulties confronted by Latin American journals and the diverse ways the journals have faced these difficulties as a likely starting point for uncovering contextualized solutions. In this interview, carried out in 2015 in the Instituto de Salud Colectiva of the Universidad Nacional de Lanús, Maria Cecília de Souza Minayo speaks to us about the context in which the journal Ciência & Saúde Coletiva emerged, the political disputes existing within the collective health field, and the relevance of debate as a constitutive process of science itself. Additionally, Minayo analyzes both the importance of funding to the growth of a journal and the problems and difficulties in obtaining funds, which puts into evidence the lack of policy regarding scientific publishing in Brazil.
