Due Austin
Department of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA.
Eur J Philos Sci. 2023;13(1):16. doi: 10.1007/s13194-023-00519-8. Epub 2023 Mar 11.
Side effects are ubiquitous in medicine and they often play a role in treatment decisions for patients and clinicians alike. Philosophers and health researchers often use side effects to illustrate issues with contemporary medical research and practice. However, technical definitions of 'side effect' differ among health authorities. Thus, determining the side effects of an intervention can differ depending on whose definition we assume. Here I review some of the common definitions of side effect and highlight their issues. In response, I offer an account of side effects as jointly (i) unintended and (ii) effects due to the causal capacities or invariances of an intervention. I discuss (i) by examining the intentions or reasons behind therapeutic interventions, and I discuss (ii) by appealing to a manipulationist model of causation. The analysis here highlights that side effects are conceptually distinct from related outcomes like adverse events, adverse drug reactions, and placebo effects. The analysis also allows for reflection on the utility of 'side effect' as a technical term in medical research and practice.
副作用在医学中无处不在,它们在患者和临床医生的治疗决策中常常发挥作用。哲学家和健康研究人员经常用副作用来说明当代医学研究和实践中的问题。然而,不同卫生当局对“副作用”的技术定义有所不同。因此,根据我们所采用的定义,确定一种干预措施的副作用可能会有所不同。在此,我回顾了一些副作用的常见定义,并突出了它们存在的问题。作为回应,我提出一种关于副作用的观点,即副作用共同具有(i)非预期性和(ii)由干预措施的因果能力或不变性所导致的效应。我通过审视治疗干预背后的意图或原因来讨论(i),并通过诉诸因果关系的操纵主义模型来讨论(ii)。这里的分析强调,副作用在概念上与不良事件、药物不良反应和安慰剂效应等相关结果是不同的。该分析还促使人们思考“副作用”作为医学研究和实践中的一个专业术语的效用。