奥斯汀-布拉德福德-希尔爵士错过的课程。

Carl V Phillips, Karen J Goodman
{"title":"奥斯汀-布拉德福德-希尔爵士错过的课程。","authors":"Carl V Phillips, Karen J Goodman","doi":"10.1186/1742-5573-1-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Austin Bradford Hill's landmark 1965 paper contains several important lessons for the current conduct of epidemiology. Unfortunately, it is almost exclusively cited as the source of the \"Bradford-Hill criteria\" for inferring causation when association is observed, despite Hill's explicit statement that cause-effect decisions cannot be based on a set of rules. Overlooked are Hill's important lessons about how to make decisions based on epidemiologic evidence. He advised epidemiologists to avoid over-emphasizing statistical significance testing, given the observation that systematic error is often greater than random error. His compelling and intuitive examples point out the need to consider costs and benefits when making decisions about health-promoting interventions. These lessons, which offer ways to dramatically increase the contribution of health science to decision making, are as needed today as they were when Hill presented them.</p>","PeriodicalId":87082,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiologic perspectives & innovations : EP+I","volume":"1 1","pages":"3"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC524370/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The missed lessons of Sir Austin Bradford Hill.\",\"authors\":\"Carl V Phillips, Karen J Goodman\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/1742-5573-1-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Austin Bradford Hill's landmark 1965 paper contains several important lessons for the current conduct of epidemiology. Unfortunately, it is almost exclusively cited as the source of the \\\"Bradford-Hill criteria\\\" for inferring causation when association is observed, despite Hill's explicit statement that cause-effect decisions cannot be based on a set of rules. Overlooked are Hill's important lessons about how to make decisions based on epidemiologic evidence. He advised epidemiologists to avoid over-emphasizing statistical significance testing, given the observation that systematic error is often greater than random error. His compelling and intuitive examples point out the need to consider costs and benefits when making decisions about health-promoting interventions. These lessons, which offer ways to dramatically increase the contribution of health science to decision making, are as needed today as they were when Hill presented them.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":87082,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Epidemiologic perspectives & innovations : EP+I\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"3\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2004-10-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC524370/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Epidemiologic perspectives & innovations : EP+I\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-5573-1-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiologic perspectives & innovations : EP+I","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-5573-1-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

奥斯汀-布拉德福德-希尔(Austin Bradford Hill)在 1965 年发表的这篇具有里程碑意义的论文为当前流行病学的发展提供了几条重要经验。遗憾的是,尽管希尔明确指出因果关系的判定不能基于一套规则,但这篇论文几乎完全被引用为在观察到关联时推断因果关系的 "布拉德福德-希尔标准 "的来源。人们忽略了希尔关于如何根据流行病学证据做出决策的重要教训。他建议流行病学家不要过分强调统计显著性检验,因为系统误差往往大于随机误差。他以直观有力的例子指出,在就促进健康的干预措施做出决策时,需要考虑成本和收益。这些经验为大幅提高健康科学对决策的贡献提供了方法,今天的人们和希尔提出这些经验时一样需要它们。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The missed lessons of Sir Austin Bradford Hill.

Austin Bradford Hill's landmark 1965 paper contains several important lessons for the current conduct of epidemiology. Unfortunately, it is almost exclusively cited as the source of the "Bradford-Hill criteria" for inferring causation when association is observed, despite Hill's explicit statement that cause-effect decisions cannot be based on a set of rules. Overlooked are Hill's important lessons about how to make decisions based on epidemiologic evidence. He advised epidemiologists to avoid over-emphasizing statistical significance testing, given the observation that systematic error is often greater than random error. His compelling and intuitive examples point out the need to consider costs and benefits when making decisions about health-promoting interventions. These lessons, which offer ways to dramatically increase the contribution of health science to decision making, are as needed today as they were when Hill presented them.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Extending the sufficient component cause model to describe the Stable Unit Treatment Value Assumption (SUTVA). Use of the integrated health interview series: trends in medical provider utilization (1972-2008). Social network analysis and agent-based modeling in social epidemiology. The use of complete-case and multiple imputation-based analyses in molecular epidemiology studies that assess interaction effects. Attributing the burden of cancer at work: three areas of concern when examining the example of shift-work.
×
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