A philosopher of science looks at medicine: do we 'need some large, simple randomized trials'?

Add to your list(s) Download to your calendar using vCal

• John Worrall (London School of Economics)
• Thursday 29 October 2009, 16:30-18:00
• Seminar Room 2, History and Philosophy of Science, Department of.

If you have a question about this talk, please contact Alex Broadbent.

A number of arguments have convinced nearly all of the medical community that randomized controlled trials provide the most telling, most scientifically weighty evidence for the efficacy of any treatment. Earlier work suggests that all but one of these arguments fail to withstand critical scrutiny.

The exception is the argument from ‘selection bias’. Although this argument sounds very plausible, I suggest in this talk that it faces a number of both epistemological and practical problems. In particular it focuses attention on the relatively under-emphasised (epistemic) issue of ‘external validity’ (generalisability to the ‘target population’) and on practical issues about the significance of (very) large trials aimed at detecting small effects.

This talk is part of the Departmental Seminars in History and Philosophy of Science series.

This talk is included in these lists:

• All Talks (aka the CURE list)
• CamBridgeSens
• Cambridge talks
• Department of History and Philosophy of Science
• Departmental Seminars in History and Philosophy of Science
• Featured lists
• History and Philosophy of Science long list
• Life Science Interface Seminars
• Philosophy Events
• Seminar Room 2, History and Philosophy of Science, Department of
• Trust & Technology Initiative - interesting events
• hc446
• jer64's list

Note that ex-directory lists are not shown.