This Viewpoint calls attention to the pervasive wrongs related to knowledge production, use, and circulation in global health, many of which are taken for granted. We argue that common practices in academic global health (eg, authorship practices, research partnerships, academic writing, editorial practices, sensemaking practices, and the choice of audience or research framing, questions, and methods) are peppered with epistemic wrongs that lead to or exacerbate epistemic injustice. We describe two forms of epistemic wrongs, credibility deficit and interpretive marginalisation, which stem from structural exclusion of marginalised producers and recipients of knowledge. We then illustrate these forms of epistemic wrongs using examples of common practices in academic global health, and show how these wrongs are linked to the pose (or positionality) and the gaze (or audience) of producers of knowledge. The epistemic injustice framework shown in this Viewpoint can help to surface, detect, communicate, make sense of, avoid, and potentially undo unfair knowledge practices in global health that are inflicted upon people in their capacity as knowers, and as producers and recipients of knowledge, owing to structural prejudices in the processes involved in knowledge production, use, and circulation in global health.

该观点提请注意与全球卫生知识生产、使用和传播相关的普遍错误，其中许多错误被认为是理所当然的。我们认为，学术全球健康领域的常见做法（例如，作者身份实践、研究合作、学术写作、编辑实践、意义建构实践以及受众或研究框架、问题和方法的选择）充斥着认知错误，这些错误会导致或加剧认知不公正。我们描述了两种形式的认知错误，可信度赤字和解释性边缘化，它们源于边缘化生产者和知识接受者的结构性排斥。然后，我们使用全球健康学术界常见做法的例子来说明这些形式的认知错误，并展示这些错误如何与知识生产者的姿势（或定位）和凝视（或观众）相关联。本观点中所示的认知不公正框架可以帮助发现、发现、交流、理解、避免并可能消除全球卫生中不公平的知识实践，这些实践以知识者、知识的生产者和接受者的身份对人们造成影响, 由于全球卫生知识生产、使用和传播过程中的结构性偏见。