The good-enough science-and-politics of anthropological collaboration with evidence-based clinical research: Four ethnographic case studies
Introduction
Anthropology's version of participant-observation ethnographic methods has carved out a productive space within the social sciences as a creative, but unruly, step-child. Anthropologists maintain their methodological feet very much on the ground but keep their theoretical head in the thin, provocative air that straddles the social sciences and the humanities. In the health sciences, however, participant-observation is not, for the most part, on the radar screen and qualitative methods remain underdeveloped and, for the most part, subordinated or openly distrusted. Quantitative experimental methods are the basis for clinical scientific credibility. To be considered valid, replicable and generalizable, research measures must be conceptually focused and unambiguously quantifiable – preferably based on biological endpoints: sero-markers rather than behavioral self-report. The gold-standard arbiter of modern evidence-based medicine is the double-blind randomized controlled trial (RCT) which stratifies research subjects to two or more treatment alternatives with a placebo arm in order to test the most basic questions of relative effectiveness of specific behavioral, pharmacological, and or/technological therapies.
In public health and medicine, the methodological term “ethnography” when it is used at all, generally refers to a standardized research protocol that would not be recognized by most anthropologists as valid: One-shot, enumerated, formal interviews conducted in an unnatural office environment that is often hampered by the bizarre hoops of arcane regulatory protocols that limit access to “human subjects.” Health researchers often use vague, somewhat oxymoronic or even Rorschach terms to describe their version of ethnographic interviews, including “semi-structured” and “guided by grounded theory.” To an anthropologist this would raise concerns that the interviews might generate impressions management discourses.
In contrast, anthropology's version of ethnographic methods strives to document context, process and meaning. Methodologically, the goal of clinical research is to rule out alternative explanations, while ethnography is attuned to the contradictory nature of social life. In fact, during the 1980s/1990s with the rise of post-modern critiques of facticity, Euro-centric discourses of linear progress (Clifford & Marcus, 1986), and the brutal legacy of colonialism in North/South relations (Asad, 1973), anthropologists, if anything, over-developed their self-critical faculties teetering on practical, collaborative and political paralysis. They are skilled at documenting the contradictions of power constraints, exceptionalisms, complications, ambiguities and the positionalities of all research participants, including both the subjects and the practitioners. Some epidemiologists might interpret these valuable self-critical theoretical anthropological concerns over the social constructedness of truth as potentially useful for identifying systemic bias or confounding variables, but many quantitative researchers simply ignore ambiguity and inconsistency by dismissing it as statistical noise that can be “controlled for” with a large enough sample size determined through a statistical technique called “power analysis.” In this techno-scientific epistemology, there is little room for thinking about “power” as an organizing force in social relations affecting health outcomes. Instead, the epidemiological term “power” is limited to a methodological concern with sample size and statistical calculation techniques.
Despite these deep epistemological differences, there exists the potential for productive scientific and political engagement in cross-methodological collaboration because of ethnography's ability to contribute to a more complexly robust “best practices research” alert to history, social structure and the unequal social power relations that damage health. The case studies that follow seek to highlight both the potential and limits of anthropological engagement with the positivist logics of quantitative epidemiology and even, at times, with cost–benefit analysis. For social scientists studying the roots of poverty in the long shadow of the punitive neoliberal turn since the 1980s, such collaboration can, in certain instances, allow for meaningful improvements in the lives of the poor and marginalized.
For the past two-and-a-half decades, the senior author, Philippe Bourgois (PB), an anthropologist located in medical schools, has been attempting to bring participant-observation anthropological methods and critical theory – at times openly but often by stealth – into direct, practical dialog with epidemiology and clinical research. Most challenging, but potentially most productive have been collaborations with random controlled public health trials and large exploratory prospective studies of medically underserved indigent populations. We present four case studies where distinct strategies of ethnographic engagement with different types of clinical, service, research and policy reform initiatives promoted institutional and political changes with varying success.
The first two ethnographic initiatives contributed to the initiation of quantitatively-organized clinical pilot-tests of new medical procedures and service deliveries for indigent patients in the San Francisco County Hospital. The third initiative is a still-ongoing randomized controlled HIV-prevention behavioral trial testing a Paulo Freire educational model of critical consciousness-raising among inmates cycling through Philadelphia's county jails system. The fourth initiative, in alliance with community-based AIDS activists, used a technical review by medical students of the “evidence-based scientific literature” on “best-medical-practices for the destitute sick,” to pressure politicians to allocate funds for subsidized housing for the HIV-positive homeless.
Section snippets
Case 1: founding an outpatient abscess clinic at the San Francisco County Hospital
From 1994 through 2007 PB was conducting participant-observation ethnographic fieldwork in the homeless encampments of an extended social network of heroin injectors and crack smokers in San Francisco. Consistent with the HIV-prevention focus of his NIH mandate, he and his ethnographic team focused their observations on the micro-details of potentially risky injection practices. They added a photo-ethnographic component to document practices visually in real time in the natural environment (
Case 2: establishing wider spectrum social services through the emergency department
The same ethnographic data that prompted PB and DC to collaborate and reach out to surgeons to alter medical care practices revealed the need for a more fundamental change in institutional practice in primary care at the County Hospital to promote systematic medical attention to the socio-economic conditions both inside and outside the hospital that were turning predictably vulnerable patients into victims of useless suffering suspended in a near-death limbo. Federal reductions in Medicare
Case 3: Teach Inside, Teach Outside (TITO) in the Philadelphia County Jail
This collaboration is a, still on-going, HIV-prevention motivational behavioral change RCT for an exceptionally politically and medically vulnerable population: US jail inmates. They suffer from 300 percent higher HIV infection rates than the general population, and most are also chronic consumers of illegal drugs (Maruschak, 2008). The third author, Jeff Draine (JD), a social work professor trained as a quantitative health services researcher, approached an activist community-based HIV-rights
Case 4: housing for people living with HIV in Philadelphia
The final initiative was not technically speaking a cross-methodological collaboration to generate new research data. It was designed as a political intervention and we include it in this discussion because it strategically combined already-existing quantitative medical data with ethnographic accounts of personal suffering to create an ostensibly neutral best-practices-medicine consensus statement (Consensus Statement HIV/AIDS in Philadelphia, 2010). That document mobilized doctors and public
Discussion: the political neutrality of quantitative research
The four case studies above outline diverse strategies for bringing ethnography and critical social-science-and-humanities-of-health theory into dialog with clinical research methods. They reveal how the health community's commitment to “best clinical practices” can: 1) promote resource transferal and service delivery to the poor; 2) enable practical institutional policy reform; and 3) generate public political debate to wider audiences without distracting polemics. Ethnography played very
Conclusion: the good-enough politics of clinical science for the “specific intellectual” in the contemporary neoliberal era
Bringing participant-observation methods into conversation with epidemiological data enables an analysis that is richer than the sum of the parts and benefits both sides of an unfortunate qualitative versus quantitative research divide. Clinically oriented participant-observation research can enable epidemiological findings to develop “socially plausible causal explanations for quantitative associations (Bourgois et al., 2006:1811; see also Ciccarone, 2003)” by documenting contextual and
Acknowledgments
Primary research funding from National Institutes of Health grants: DA010164, DA027204, DA27599. Comparative and background data supported by grants: AA020331, DA027689, MH076068. Editorial assistance by Keahnan Washington.
References (42)
With both eyes open: notes on a disciplinary dialogue between ethnographic and epidemiological research among injection drug users
International Journal of Drug Policy
(2003)Heroin in brown, black and white: structural factors and medical consequences in the US heroin market
International Journal of Drug Policy
(2009)- et al.
Education, empowerment and community-based structural reinforcement: an HIV prevention response to mass incarceration and removal
International Journal of Law and Psychiatry
(2011) - et al.
The effects of clinical case management on hospital service use among ED frequent users
American Journal of Emergency Medicine
(2000) - et al.
The social structural production of HIV risk among injecting drug users
Social Science & Medicine
(2005) Lumpen abuse: the human cost of righteous neoliberalism
City and Society
(2011)- et al.
The structural vulnerability imposed by hypersegregated US inner city neighborhoods–a theoretical and practical challenge for substance abuse research
Addiction
(2011) - et al.
Reinterpreting ethnic patterns among white and African American men who inject heroin: a social science of medicine approach
PLoS Medicine
(2006) - et al.
Too long a wait for housing
Philadelphia Inquirer
(December 2, 2010)
Righteous dopefiend
The psychic life of power: theories in subjection
Soft tissue infections among injection drug users–San Francisco, California, 1996–2000
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report
Explaining the geographical variation of HIV among injection drug users in the United States
Substance Use & Misuse
City of Philadelphia homeless death review, 2009–2010
Writing culture
Medical and public health consensus statement on housing as treatment and prevention for HIV/AIDS in Philadelphia
Never again? Reflections on Human Values and Human Rights
Tanner Lectures on Human Values
History of sexuality
Birth of the clinic: the birth of the prison
Cited by (39)
Rethinking urban-rural designations in public health surveillance of the overdose crisis and crafting an agenda for future monitoring
2023, International Journal of Drug PolicyDeported, homeless, and into the canal: Environmental structural violence in the binational Tijuana River
2022, Social Science and MedicineThe introduction of fentanyl on the US–Mexico border: An ethnographic account triangulated with drug checking data from Tijuana
2022, International Journal of Drug PolicyXylazine spreads across the US: A growing component of the increasingly synthetic and polysubstance overdose crisis
2022, Drug and Alcohol DependenceCitation Excerpt :Analyses were conducted iteratively, throughout the fieldwork process, with emerging analytical insights further refining follow-up questions, and targeting follow-up research activities (see (Friedman et al., 2019; Karandinos et al., 2014; Bourgois, 2003; Bourgois and Schonberg, 2009; Bourgois et al., 2016)). Qualitative data gathered during 15 years of ethnographic fieldwork generated numerous quantitative hypotheses, which we have explored through multimethod collaborations with quantitative researchers (Friedman et al., 2019; Rosenblum et al., 2014; Messac et al., 2013). Quantitative data describing overdose deaths were collected as part of a larger research effort (Shover et al., 2020) to assemble and assess granular person-level records from medical examiner and coroner jurisdictions that publish overdose data ahead of federal statistics (which are typically available in their finalized form on a 12–24 month lag (CDC WONDER, 2020).
Legacies of the war on drugs: Next of kin of persons who died of opioid overdose and harm reduction interventions in Philadelphia
2021, International Journal of Drug PolicyChallenging categorical thinking: A mixed methods approach to explaining health inequalities
2021, Social Science and MedicineCitation Excerpt :Connell (2012) argues that the use of quantitative categories is ill-suited to analysing the historical, dynamic social processes that create categories and the inequalities between them, as well as the contestation and agency at play in how people interact with and situate themselves within these processes. Anthropologists have offered similar critiques (e.g.: Adams et al., 2019; Bourgios and Hart, 2011 cited in Messac et al., 2013). While the approach outlined in this paper makes connections between its findings and macro social processes based on existing literature, novel analysis of macro social processes based on primary data is indeed beyond its scope.