Back to Annual Meeting Page
|
133rd Annual Meeting & Exposition December 10-14, 2005 Philadelphia, PA |
||
1003.0: Saturday, December 10, 2005: 9:00 AM-5:00 PM | |||
CE Hours: 6 contact hours | |||
| |||
Statement of Purpose and Institute Overview: | |||
The purpose of this Institute is to offer to the participants a basic overview of principles and methods of modern informal logic and critical thinking as used and required for effective formulation of public health programs and policies, priority setting, implementation, analysis, and evaluation. Logic and critical thinking is becoming a necessary additional companion to epidemiology, biostatistics and other basic sciences underlying rational public health. It underlies the whole process of understanding of health problems in the community and making decisions about them. The program will show that any important claim in practice, research, administration or health policy making should be the outcome of use of the best evidence in cogent argumentation accompanied by critical appraisal. The presentation of the activities will be conducted throughout with reference to examples from the public health field. As much as possible, participants will be encouraged to bring their own topics to the program. Selected topics will be used for analysis and improvement by all. | |||
Introduction outlining the other APHA initiative,framework and representative interests - Hughes; Objectives of the Institue - Jenicek, Hitchcock | |||
Epidemiologists, biostastisticians, health policy makers and community health stakeholders in the world of critical thinking - what they have in common and how they differ - Jenicek | |||
The process of thinking critically about a public health problem - Hitchcock | |||
Break | |||
Criteria for good reasoning - Hitchcock | |||
Discussion (plenary session or small groups) - Jenicek, Hitchcock | |||
Working Lunch & Reading | |||
How to read and write a research or health policy paper as a valid and understandable argument - Jenicek, Hitchcock | |||
Fallacies in reasoning, how to recognize, qualify and correct them (few illustrative examples) - Hitchcock, Jenicek | |||
Break | |||
Cases brought in, reported, analyzed, and commented by participants. Testimonies from research and practice. Cases pre-selected by Faculty. Small group discussion, plenary round table - Jenicek, Hitchcock | |||
Plenary discussion and evaluation - Jenicek, Hitchcock, Hughes | |||
Evidence-Based Practice – Logic and Critical Thinking | |||
For more detailed information click here | |||
Organized by: | APHA-Continuing Education Institutes | ||
CE Credits: | CME, Health Education (CHES), Nursing |
The 133rd Annual Meeting & Exposition (December 10-14, 2005) of APHA