As it turns, GIS is fast gaining ground with more applications every year. The GIS-health nexus has always been a special one, especially with regard to communicable diseases. As technology drives many facets of health care and research, is the use of GIS still lagging behind? I aim to understand why!
I think that this situation fits in a more general context, the one of an increasing gap, on one hand among the scientific-technical communities, and on the other hand between these ones and decision makers. For fostering the application of GIS technologies in sensitive areas, such as "communicable diseases", I consider that post-normal science might be a promising approach.
I quite okay with Ruxandra Vintila and I add in my opinion that the application of GIS in certain area, such as communicable diseases, yet lack of interfacing tools to make it easier to use by all stakeholders and users sig
Thanks all for these enlightening responses. I do believe the general consensus here is that accessibility and learning are the major constraints to the mainstream use of GIS. There is an increased use of "open-source" GIS software, which has potential, but their acceptance in high-impact journals remains to be seen. My learning of GIS has mostly been "self-taught", I do agree that it takes a bit of time and perhaps an expansion in thinking, but I do not think it is as hard as most people new to it would think it to be!
GIS is used not still enough and cause of it is a technical complexity of the product, and lack of IT competence in medical researchers knowledge (there is no information how to use GIS). I think, GIS is not only visualization tool, but also is a possibility for analysis like spatial-temporal spreading and density occurrence of infection disease etc. Researcher can try to use soft EpiInfo 7.0 of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Geoinformatics
- Geographic Information System