Tretter F, Löffler-Stastka H. Medical knowledge integration and "systems medicine": Needs, ambitions, limitations and options.
Med Hypotheses 2019;
133:109386. [PMID:
31541780 DOI:
10.1016/j.mehy.2019.109386]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2019] [Revised: 08/22/2019] [Accepted: 08/29/2019] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
Medicine today is an extremely heterogeneous field of knowledge, based on clinical observations and action knowledge and on data from the biological, behavioral and social sciences. We hypothesize at first that medicine suffers from a disciplinary hyper-diversity compared to the level of conceptual interdisciplinary integration. With the claim to "understand" and cure diseases, currently with the label "Systems Medicine" new forms of molecular medicine promise a general new bottom-up directed precise, personalized, predictive, preventive, translational, participatory, etc. medicine. Our second hypothesis rejects this claim because of conceptual, methodological and theoretical weaknesses. In contrary, this is our third hypothesis; we suggest that top-down organismic systems medicine, related to general system theory, opens better options for an integrative scientific understanding of processes of health and disease.
Collapse