Why There ’ s No Cause to Randomize

@inproceedings{Worrall2006WhyT,
  title={Why There ’ s No Cause to Randomize},
  author={John Worrall},
  year={2006}
}
The evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is widely regarded as supplying the ‘gold standard’ in medicine—we may sometimes have to settle for other forms of evidence, but this is always epistemically second-best. But how well justified is the epistemic claim about the superiority of RCTs? This paper adds to my earlier (predominantly negative) analyses of the claims produced in favour of the idea that randomization plays a uniquely privileged epistemic role, by closely inspecting… CONTINUE READING

From This Paper

Topics from this paper.

References

Publications referenced by this paper.
Showing 1-10 of 17 references

Randomization and the design of experiments

  • P. M. Urbach
  • Philosophy of Science,
  • 1985
Highly Influential
10 Excerpts

Nature’s Capacities and their Measurement

  • N. Cartwright
  • 1989
Highly Influential
4 Excerpts

Hume’s Problem, New York and Oxford

  • C. Howson
  • 2000
3 Excerpts

Randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs

  • J. Concato, N. Shah, I HorwitzR.
  • New England Journal of Medicine,
  • 2000

Reply to David Papineau

  • P. M. Urbach
  • British Journal for the Philosophy of Science,
  • 1994

Similar Papers

Loading similar papers…