Public and Environmental Economics Research Centre (PEERC), Johannesburg Institute for Advanced Study (JIAS), School of Economics, University of Johannesburg, JBS, Empire Road, Auckland Park, Johannesburg, 2092, South Africa.
Hist Philos Life Sci. 2021 Mar 25;43(2):43. doi: 10.1007/s40656-021-00403-9.
Reluctance to endorse mask wearing to slow transmission of SARS-Cov-2 has been rationalized by the failure of randomized control trials (RCTs) to provide supportive evidence. In contrast, a mechanism-based approach suggests that mask wearing should be expected to reduce transmission: so that contrary evidence from RCTs likely reflects the need to focus policy attention on addressing interacting or mediating factors that offset the basic positive effect. The differing conclusions that result from these two approaches reflect the limitations of RCT-based approaches that are compounded in scenarios, such as pandemics, where urgent decisions are required with limited evidence.
人们不愿意支持通过佩戴口罩来减缓 SARS-CoV-2 的传播，理由是随机对照试验（RCT）未能提供支持性证据。相比之下，基于机制的方法表明，佩戴口罩应该可以减少传播：因此，来自 RCT 的相反证据可能反映了需要关注解决相互作用或调节因素的必要性，这些因素抵消了基本的积极影响。这两种方法得出的不同结论反映了基于 RCT 的方法的局限性，在需要根据有限的证据做出紧急决策的情况下，这种局限性更加严重，例如在大流行期间。
