论文部分内容阅读
帕金森病目前虽有很多候选疗法,但最佳疗法尚无定论。尽管有些疗法在部分患者身上体现出了较好的效果,却因为对照实验的结果与专家的预期不一致,而在得到优化前就被科学家放弃了。于是,探讨在对照实验面前,不同的疗法作为不同的“研究纲领”孰优孰劣,成为一个具有积极意义的课题。本文就拉卡托斯的研究纲领方法论作为一种视角来尝试评论帕金森病对照实验的作用和必要性,进而探讨潜在疗法如何才能成为进步的研究纲领而被保留和优化。
Although there are many candidate treatments for Parkinson’s disease, the best treatment is inconclusive. Although some therapies have shown good results in some patients, they were abandoned by scientists before they were optimized because the results of the controlled experiments were inconsistent with the experts’ expectations. Therefore, to explore in front of the control experiment, different therapies as different “research program ” which one is better, become a topic of positive significance. This article attempts to comment on the role and necessity of Lakatos’ research program methodology as a reviewing perspective on how Parkinson’s disease is controlled and then explores how potential therapies can be retained and optimized as a research program for improvement.