Literature DB >> 1262118

Against Popperized epidemiology.

M Jacobsen.   

Abstract

The recommendation of Popper's philosophy of science should be adopted by epidemiologists is disputed. Reference is made to other authors who have shown that the most constructive elements in Popper's ideas have been advocated by earlier philosophers and have been used in epidemiology without abandoning inductive reasoning. It is argued that Popper's denigration of inductive methods is particularly harmful to epidemiology. Inductive reasoning and statistical inference play a key role in the science; it is suggested that unfamiliarity with these ideas contributes to widespread misunderstanding of the function of epidemiology. Attention is drawn to a common fallacy involving correlations between three random variables. The prevalence of the fallacy may be related to confusion between deductive and inductive logic.

Mesh:

Year:  1976        PMID: 1262118     DOI: 10.1093/ije/5.1.9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0300-5771            Impact factor:   7.196


  4 in total

1.  Causality assessment in epidemiology.

Authors:  P Vineis
Journal:  Theor Med       Date:  1991-06

Review 2.  A landmark for popperian epidemiology: refutation of the randomised Aldactone evaluation study.

Authors:  Elard Koch; Alvaro Otarola; Aida Kirschbaum
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 3.710

Review 3.  Cause of occupational disease.

Authors:  D C Muir
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 4.402

4.  Epidemiology: second-rate science?

Authors:  M Parascandola
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  1998 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.792

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.