Division of Epidemiology and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, 1300 South Second Street, Minneapolis, MN 55454, USA.
Am J Epidemiol. 2012 Dec 15;176(12):1071-7. doi: 10.1093/aje/kws374. Epub 2012 Nov 20.
Guidelines for causal inference in epidemiologic associations were a major contribution to modern epidemiologic analysis in the 1960s. This story recounts dramatic elements in a series of exchanges leading to their formulation and effective use in the 1964 Report of the Advisory Committee to the US Surgeon General on Smoking and Health, the landmark report which concluded that cigarette smoking caused lung cancer. The opening salvo was precipitated by Ancel Keys' presentation of an ecologic correlation between diet and cardiac death, which was vigorously criticized in an article by Jacob Yerushalmy calling for "proper handling" of bias and confounding in observational evidence. The dispute demonstrated a need for guidelines for causal inference and set off their serial refinement among US thinkers. Less well documented parallel efforts went on in the United Kingdom, leading to the criteria that Bradford Hill presented in his 1965 President's Address to the Royal Society of Medicine. Here the authors recount experiences with some of the principals involved in development of these criteria and note the omission from both classic reports of proper attribution to those who helped create the guidelines. They also present direct, if unsatisfying, evidence about those particular lapses.
流行病学关联的因果推断指南是 20 世纪 60 年代现代流行病学分析的主要贡献。这个故事讲述了一系列交流导致其形成的戏剧性元素,这些交流促成了 1964 年美国卫生总监顾问委员会关于吸烟与健康的报告的有效使用,该报告是具有里程碑意义的报告,结论是吸烟导致肺癌。这一系列交流的导火索是 Ancel Keys 提出的饮食与心脏死亡之间的生态相关性,Jacob Yerushalmy 在一篇文章中对此进行了激烈批评,呼吁在观察性证据中“正确处理”偏差和混杂因素。这场争论表明需要因果推断指南,并引发了美国思想家对其进行的一系列改进。在英国也进行了记录较少但平行的努力,最终形成了 Bradford Hill 在 1965 年向皇家医学会发表的主席演讲中提出的标准。在这里,作者讲述了参与制定这些标准的一些主要人物的经历,并注意到这两份经典报告都没有正确归因于那些帮助制定指南的人。他们还提供了关于这些特定失误的直接但并不令人满意的证据。