Preface and specialists can also keep an ear for actual usage, from which meanings must also be extracted. When we were choosing terms and meanings, we not only kept epidemiological theory and general logic in mind, but usage as well, and often attested explicitly the different uses of polysemic terms. The word"dictionary"is itself notoriously polysemic. 3 This book shows how comfortable the coexistence healthy"micropolysemic"variation in the terms and definitions. This edition also reflects, I believe, how plural--professionally, scientifically, culturally, and ideologically--epidemiologists are John Last's outstanding first four editions were themselves the result of a highly comprehensive and inclusive process of selection of terms and definitions: some 20 years of fantastic collaborative work by several hundred contributors since the early 1980s. The five editions are an extraordinary"record-a"DVD, if you wish, or an"mp4-of the evolution of epidemiology during the last quarter century. I think they are also excellent materials for a sociology of epidemiology Therefore, as we continued the process and revised the last edition, we kept ell in mind many types of reader, most with unimaginable resources, smart, IT-wise. Although you are cordially invited to pull the many strings that this book holds by simply reading and turning its pages with your fingers(odd and familiar as this may at once seem), we assumed that these pages were just a stop on your journey: perhaps you just came here from Oxford Reference Online and will next be at The Cochrane Library. Who could know? You know Not only can you always expand and progress on what you find here, we know you can always assess, contrast, verify. Quite a responsibility for an editor of a dictionary. This duty is not new, but it surely works on a different scale nowa days. It is now so easy to find that we were wrong, narrow-minded, off beam too punctilious In the meantime, the ancestral book and our beloved library have not died. Neither did the paper journal. News of the death of academic journals--loudly proclaimed in the early years of this, the long awaited twenty-first century-were premature. We therefore may hope that this book will again find a place in your mind and be close to your heart. It's light in weight, its pages will welcome your handwriting, it can be comfortably read out there in the sunlight-batteries are not needed My call for contributions to this 5th edition was widely disseminated beginnin early in 2006--prominently, in the International Journal of Epidemiology and he Newsletter of the International Epidemiological Association(IEA), the worldwide scientific organization of epidemiologists that has nurtured all editions. The call was operationally answered by 224 professionals who registered in the wiki that we had set up with Oxford University Press. When invited to choose the sentence that best described their professional relationship with epidemiology, 67% of respondents selected"I have some to extensive training in epidemiologyand specialists can also keep an ear for actual usage, from which meanings must also be extracted. When we were choosing terms and meanings, we not only kept epidemiological theory and general logic in mind, but usage as well, and often attested explicitly the different uses of polysemic terms. The word “dictionary” is itself notoriously polysemic.395 This book shows how comfortable the coexistence of diverse meanings of “dictionary” can be. More importantly, it also shows a healthy “micropolysemic” variation395 in the terms and defi nitions. This edition also refl ects, I believe, how plural—professionally, scientifi cally, culturally, and ideologically—epidemiologists are. John Last’s outstanding fi rst four editions were themselves the result of a highly comprehensive and inclusive process of selection of terms and defi nitions: some 20 years of fantastic collaborative work by several hundred contributors since the early 1980s. The fi ve editions are an extraordinary “record” —a “DVD,” if you wish, or an “mp4”— of the evolution of epidemiology during the last quarter century. I think they are also excellent materials for a sociology of epidemiology. Therefore, as we continued the process and revised the last edition, we kept well in mind many types of reader, most with unimaginable resources, smart, “IT-wise.” Although you are cordially invited to pull the many strings that this book holds by simply reading and turning its pages with your fi ngers (odd and familiar as this may at once seem), we assumed that these pages were just a stop on your journey: perhaps you just came here from Oxford Reference Online and will next be at The Cochrane Library. Who could know? You know. Not only can you always expand and progress on what you fi nd here, we know you can always assess, contrast, verify. Quite a responsibility for an editor of a dictionary. This duty is not new, but it surely works on a different scale nowa￾days. It is now so easy to fi nd that we were wrong, narrow-minded, off beam, too punctilious . . . In the meantime, the ancestral book and our beloved library have not died. Neither did the paper journal. News of the death of academic journals—loudly proclaimed in the early years of this, the long awaited twenty-fi rst century—were premature. We therefore may hope that this book will again fi nd a place in your mind and be close to your heart. It’s light in weight, its pages will welcome your handwriting, it can be comfortably read out there in the sunlight—batteries are not needed. * * * My call for contributions to this 5th edition was widely disseminated beginning early in 2006—prominently, in the International Journal of Epidemiology and the Newsletter of the International Epidemiological Association (IEA), the worldwide scientifi c organization of epidemiologists that has nurtured all editions. The call was operationally answered by 224 professionals who registered in the wiki that we had set up with Oxford University Press. When invited to choose the sentence that best described their professional relationship with epidemiology, 67% of respondents selected “I have some to extensive training in epidemiology Preface x