Suppr超能文献

Evidence and alternative medicine.

作者信息

Stalker D F

机构信息

Department of Philosophy, University of Delaware, Newark 19716, USA.

出版信息

Mt Sinai J Med. 1995 Mar;62(2):132-43; discussion 159-62.

PMID:7753080
Abstract

The most important thing we have to decide about alternative therapies is whether to test them in a clinical trial format. In order to decide this, we need to compare the prior probabilities of alternative therapy hypotheses with the prior probabilities of conventional therapy hypotheses that end up in clinical trials. If the prior probabilities of the alternative therapy hypotheses are lower than the prior probabilities for their competing conventional hypotheses, we do not have a good reason to test them. There are basic science reasons, source reasons, and methodologic reasons for assigning low prior probabilities to typical alternative therapy hypotheses--indeed, hypotheses that the NIH Office of Alternative Medicine supports. Basic science reasons are of two types: whether the hypothesis agrees with a piece of basic science that does not have a good deal of support, and whether the hypothesis is logically incompatible with a well-supported piece of basic science. The source reasons are about the educational and other characteristics of the people who discover, pursue, and promote a therapy hypothesis. The methodologic reasons are about how well a therapy hypothesis satisfies methodologic criteria such as simplicity and modesty. Other things being equal, a hypothesis that is simpler and more modest than other is more plausible as well. Problems arise also about using positive cases in assigning a prior probability to an alternative-therapy hypothesis because virtually every alternative therapy has positive cases, but not every hypothesis is true. The NCI and OTA "best-case" review approach does not solve this problem because it does not include a rule for distinguishing (in a reliable way) between positive cases that show something about a therapy hypothesis being true and positive cases that show nothing of the kind. This paper (as long as it is) is no more than an introductory discussion of some basic points involved in making sensible estimates of the prior probabilities of hypotheses.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

摘要

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验