منابع مشابه
Comparative effectiveness research: what to do when experts disagree about risks
BACKGROUND Ethical issues related to comparative effectiveness research, or research that compares existing standards of care, have recently received considerable attention. In this paper we focus on how Ethics Review Committees (ERCs) should evaluate the risks of comparative effectiveness research. MAIN TEXT We discuss what has been a prominent focus in the debate about comparative effective...
متن کاملWhy do experts on ectodermal dysplasia (ED) meet again?
Hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia was first described in the mid 19 century by John Thurnam. In 1875, Charles Darwin described the signs and symptoms in a fourgeneration family, “the ten men from Scinde”, explaining X-linked inheritance at the same time when Gregor Mendel mapped the laws of inheritance. The typical clinical expression in boys with X-linked hypohidrotic ED makes this syndrome ea...
متن کاملWhy Do Some Find it Hard to Disagree? An fMRI Study
People often find it hard to disagree with others, but how this disposition varies across individuals or how it is influenced by social factors like other people's level of expertise remains little understood. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), we found that activity across a network of brain areas [comprising posterior medial frontal cortex (pMFC), anterior insula (AI), inferi...
متن کاملWhy do forecasters disagree? Lessons from the term structure of cross-sectional dispersion
Key sources of disagreement among economic forecasters are identified by using data on cross-sectional dispersion in forecasters’ longand short-run predictions of macroeconomic variables. Dispersion among forecasters is highest at long horizons where private information is of limited value and lower at short forecast horizons. Moreover, differences in views persist through time. Such difference...
متن کاملWhy Experts Make Errors
Expert latent f ingerprint examiners were presented with fingerprints taken from real criminal cases. Half of the prints had been previously judged as individualizations and the other half as exclusions. We re-presented the same prints to the same experts who had judged them previously, but provided biasing contextual information in both the individualizations and exclusions. A control set of i...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
ژورنال
عنوان ژورنال: Critical Review
سال: 2020
ISSN: 0891-3811,1933-8007
DOI: 10.1080/08913811.2020.1872948