Establishing Causal Claims in Medicine

IF 0.7 2区 哲学 Q2 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE International Studies in the Philosophy of Science Pub Date : 2019-01-02 DOI:10.1080/02698595.2019.1630927
Jon Williamson
{"title":"Establishing Causal Claims in Medicine","authors":"Jon Williamson","doi":"10.1080/02698595.2019.1630927","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Russo and Williamson [2007. “Interpreting Causality in the Health Sciences.” International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 21: 157–170] put forward the following thesis: in order to establish a causal claim in medicine, one normally needs to establish both that the putative cause and putative effect are appropriately correlated and that there is some underlying mechanism that can account for this correlation. I argue that, although the Russo–Williamson thesis conflicts with the tenets of present-day evidence-based medicine (EBM), it offers a better causal epistemology than that provided by present-day EBM because it better explains two key aspects of causal discovery. First, the thesis better explains the role of clinical studies in establishing causal claims. Second, it yields a better account of extrapolation.","PeriodicalId":44433,"journal":{"name":"International Studies in the Philosophy of Science","volume":"32 1","pages":"33 - 61"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02698595.2019.1630927","citationCount":"42","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Studies in the Philosophy of Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02698595.2019.1630927","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 42

Abstract

ABSTRACT Russo and Williamson [2007. “Interpreting Causality in the Health Sciences.” International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 21: 157–170] put forward the following thesis: in order to establish a causal claim in medicine, one normally needs to establish both that the putative cause and putative effect are appropriately correlated and that there is some underlying mechanism that can account for this correlation. I argue that, although the Russo–Williamson thesis conflicts with the tenets of present-day evidence-based medicine (EBM), it offers a better causal epistemology than that provided by present-day EBM because it better explains two key aspects of causal discovery. First, the thesis better explains the role of clinical studies in establishing causal claims. Second, it yields a better account of extrapolation.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
建立医学上的因果关系
Russo和Williamson[2007]。"解释健康科学中的因果关系"[科学哲学的国际研究][21:157-170]提出了以下论点:为了在医学上建立因果关系,人们通常需要确定假定的原因和假定的结果是适当相关的,并且存在一些潜在的机制可以解释这种相关性。我认为,尽管Russo-Williamson论文与当今循证医学(EBM)的原则相冲突,但它提供了比当今循证医学更好的因果认识论,因为它更好地解释了因果发现的两个关键方面。首先,本文更好地解释了临床研究在建立因果关系方面的作用。其次,它可以更好地解释外推。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Studies in the Philosophy of Science
International Studies in the Philosophy of Science HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE-
自引率
12.50%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: International Studies in the Philosophy of Science is a scholarly journal dedicated to publishing original research in philosophy of science and in philosophically informed history and sociology of science. Its scope includes the foundations and methodology of the natural, social, and human sciences, philosophical implications of particular scientific theories, and broader philosophical reflection on science. The editors invite contributions not only from philosophers, historians, and sociologists of science, but also from researchers in the sciences. The journal publishes articles from a wide variety of countries and philosophical traditions.
期刊最新文献
Tightrope-Walking Rationality in Action: Feyerabendian Insights for the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics Natural Selection, Mechanism and Phenomenon Are the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) and the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) Applicable in Determining the Optimal Fit and Simplicity of Mechanistic Models? Reviewers Acknowledgement Defending a Realist Stance
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1