Pii: S0895-4356(00)00347-4
نویسنده
چکیده
The double-blind randomized controlled trial (RCT) is accepted by medicine as objective scientific methodology that, when ideally performed, produces knowledge untainted by bias. The validity of the RCT rests not just on theoretical arguments, but also on the discrepancy between the RCT and less rigorous evidence (the difference is sometimes considered an objective measure of bias). A brief overview of historical and recent developments in “the discrepancy argument” is presented. The article then examines the possibility that some of this “deviation from truth” may be the result of artifacts introduced by the masked RCT itself. Can an “unbiased” method produce bias? Among the experiments examined are those that augment the methodological stringency of a normal RCT in order to render the experiment less susceptible to subversion by the mind. This methodology, a hypothetical “platinum” standard, can be used to judge the “gold” standard. The concealment in a placebo-controlled RCT seems capable of generating a “masking bias.” Other potential biases, such as “investigator self-selection,” “preference,” and “consent” are also briefly discussed. Such potential distortions indicate that the double-blind RCT may not be objective in the realist sense, but rather is objective in a “softer” disciplinary sense. Some “facts” may not exist independent of the apparatus of their production. © 2001 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.
منابع مشابه
Pii: S0895-4356(00)00206-7
Although the placebo in a clinical trial is often considered simply a baseline against which to evaluate the efficacy of a clinical intervention, there is evidence that the magnitude of placebo effect may be a critical factor in determining the results of a trial. This article examines the question of whether devices have enhanced placebo effects and, if so, what the implications may be. While ...
متن کاملPii: S0895-4356(00)00344-9
A critique is presented of the use of tree-based partitioning algorithms to formulate classification rules and identify subgroups from clinical and epidemiological data. It is argued that the methods have a number of limitations, despite their popularity and apparent closeness to clinical reasoning processes. The issue of redundancy in tree-derived decision rules is discussed. Simple rules may ...
متن کاملPii: S0895-4356(02)00504-8
An almost endless number of observations and experiments have effectively falsified the hypothesis that dietary cholesterol and fats, and a high cholesterol level play a role in the causation of atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease. The hypothesis is maintained because allegedly supportive, but insignificant findings, are inflated, and because most contradictory results are misinterpreted...
متن کاملPii: S0895-4356(00)00318-8
Although abdominal obesity, as measured by waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), has long been recognized as a risk factor for metabolic and cardiovascular diseases, little is known about the effect of WHR on pulmonary function, especially in women. In this study of 1094 men and 540 women (18–102 years) from the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging (BLSA), we examined the effect of WHR on forced expirator...
متن کامل