Key result
Better integration of communicable and non-communicable diseases is needed to replace outdated clinical paradigms.
Why the study?
The split between communicable and non-communicable diseases stems from colonialism, but increasing evidence suggests a closer relationship between these disease silos would be beneficial.
Integrating the research and clinical care of communicable and non-communicable diseases is essential for modern public health and pandemic preparedness.
The dominant paradigm in clinical medicine, public health and global health has been to split clinical practice, research, education, training and funding into communicable versus non-communicable diseases. This dichotomy was borne out of the context of colonialism and increasingly, not least during the recent COVID-19 pandemic, evidence suggests that a much closer relationship between these 'disease siloes' would be beneficial, from risk factors to therapeutics. In this lecture, the synergies between communicable and non-communicable diseases are explored in order to inform future policy and practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Amitava Banerjee (2025) conducted a review in Communicable and non-communicable diseases. The strict dichotomy between communicable and non-communicable diseases is an outdated paradigm, and better integration of these disease areas in research and clinical practice is needed.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: