[7] Nevertheless, PRISM or other tools need to be validated, and concepts of psychological and sociological risk perception research need

to be integrated in further studies on risk perception in travel medicine. We thus welcome the fact that Dr Zimmer has further encouraged the required discussion of this issue. “
“The article “Travel Medicine Research Priorities: Establishing an Evidence Base” by Talbot et al.1 correctly alerts to the many gaps in the knowledge base of the discipline due to its diversity and breadth and an ongoing lack of funding for travel health projects. To represent potentially selleck products important research directions, the authors compiled tables of study designs of selected projects and proposed a list of research questions. Unfortunately, the authors only canvased one half of scientific inquiry, the traditional quantitative approach. This is particularly disappointing considering that travel medicine stands and falls with people (the travelers) and their attitudes and behavior, especially when it comes to adhering to or implementing pretravel advice. As the cochair of the International Society of Travel Medicine (ISTM) Research Committee, on whose behalf this article is said to have been written, I would like to comment

on this oversight for completeness sake. Rigorous qualitative studies cannot be excluded from travel medicine research and funding programs. Only this type selleck kinase inhibitor of inquiry allows us to gain a deep understanding of fundamental issues on which much of travel health professionals’ work is based. For example, the best research on vaccination has limited use if travelers do not see the need for vaccinations. If we do not put more effort into understanding

the people who are at the center of travel medicine, the discipline will always remain confined to describing quantitatively what travelers do (or not do) and treating what is largely preventable. Talbot et al. rightly Branched chain aminotransferase point out the need for strategies which improve compliance with vector prevention measures or which promote adherence to safe sex practices. However, such strategies cannot be based on figures but must emerge and build on evidence obtained through qualitative research. Medical doctors are not normally trained in qualitative research methods. This is also one reason why, traditionally, qualitative grant proposals struggle to get funded. Yet, there is a need for both sides of scientific inquiry to establish a comprehensive knowledge base. This need also provides travel health professionals with opportunities to collaborate with other researchers and to conduct multidisciplinary studies for the benefit of the discipline and the travelers it serves.