11 found
Order:
  1.  26
    Evaluating Evidence of Mechanisms in Medicine.Veli-Pekka Parkkinen, Christian Wallmann, Michael Wilde, Brendan Clarke, Phyllis Illari, Michael P. Kelly, Charles Norell, Federica Russo, Beth Shaw & Jon Williamson - 2018 - Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
    The use of evidence in medicine is something we should continuously seek to improve. This book seeks to develop our understanding of evidence of mechanism in evaluating evidence in medicine, public health, and social care; and also offers tools to help implement improved assessment of evidence of mechanism in practice. In this way, the book offers a bridge between more theoretical and conceptual insights and worries about evidence of mechanism and practical means to fit the results into evidence assessment procedures.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  2.  21
    The Use of Mechanistic Evidence in Drug Approval.Jeffrey K. Aronson, Adam La Caze, Michael P. Kelly, Veli-Pekka Parkkinen & Jon Williamson - 2018 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 24 (5):1166-1176.
    The role of mechanistic evidence tends to be under‐appreciated in current evidence‐based medicine, which focusses on clinical studies, tending to restrict attention to randomized controlled studies when they are available. The EBM+ programme seeks to redress this imbalance, by suggesting methods for evaluating mechanistic studies alongside clinical studies. Drug approval is a problematic case for the view that mechanistic evidence should be taken into account, because RCTs are almost always available. Nevertheless, we argue that mechanistic evidence is central to all (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  3.  34
    Causal Knowledge in Evidence-Based Medicine. In Reply to Kerryet Al.'S Causation and Evidence-Based Practice: An Ontological Review.Anders Strand & Veli-Pekka Parkkinen - 2014 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 20 (6):981-984.
    Kerry et al. criticize our discussion of causal knowledge in evidence-based medicine (EBM) and our assessment of the relevance of their dispositionalist ontology for EBM. Three issues need to be addressed in response: (1) problems concerning transfer of causal knowledge across heterogeneous contexts; (2) how predictions about the effects of individual treatments based on population-level evidence from RCTs are fallible; and (3) the relevance of ontological theories like dispositionalism for EBM.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  4.  5
    Extrapolation and the Russo–Williamson Thesis.Michael Wilde & Veli-Pekka Parkkinen - 2019 - Synthese 196 (8):3251-3262.
    A particular tradition in medicine claims that a variety of evidence is helpful in determining whether an observed correlation is causal. In line with this tradition, it has been claimed that establishing a causal claim in medicine requires both probabilistic and mechanistic evidence. This claim has been put forward by Federica Russo and Jon Williamson. As a result, it is sometimes called the Russo–Williamson thesis. In support of this thesis, Russo and Williamson appeal to the practice of the International Agency (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  5.  27
    Synthetic Biology and Genetic Causation.Gry Oftedal & Veli-Pekka Parkkinen - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 44 (2):208-216.
    Synthetic biology research is often described in terms of programming cells through the introduction of synthetic genes. Genetic material is seemingly attributed with a high level of causal responsibility. We discuss genetic causation in synthetic biology and distinguish three gene concepts differing in their assumptions of genetic control. We argue that synthetic biology generally employs a difference-making approach to establishing genetic causes, and that this approach does not commit to a specific notion of genetic program or genetic control. Still, we (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  6.  10
    Causation in Evidence-Based Medicine: In Reply to Kerryet Al.Anders Strand & Veli-Pekka Parkkinen - 2015 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 21 (3):532-534.
  7.  19
    Robustness and Evidence of Mechanisms in Early Experimental Atherosclerosis Research.Veli-Pekka Parkkinen - 2016 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 60:44-55.
  8.  31
    Scientific Disagreement and Evidential Pluralism: Lessons From the Studies on Hypercholesterolemia.Veli-Pekka Parkkinen, Federica Russo & Christian Wallmann - 2017 - Humana Mente 10 (32):75-116.
    Inconsistencies between scientific theories have been studied, by and large, from the perspective of paraconsistent logic. This approach considered the formal properties of theories and the structure of inferences one can legitimately draw from theories. However, inconsistencies can be also analysed from the perspective of modelling practices, in particular how modelling practices may lead scientists to form opinions and attitudes that are different, but not necessarily inconsistent. In such cases, it is preferable to talk about disagreement, rather than inconsistency. Disagreement (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9.  21
    The Use of Evidence of Mechanisms in Drug Approval.Jeffrey Aronson, Adam La Caze, Michael Kelly, Veli-Pekka Parkkinen & Jon Williamson - forthcoming - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice.
    The role of mechanistic evidence tends to be under-appreciated in current evidencebased medicine (EBM), which focusses on clinical studies, tending to restrict attention to randomized controlled studies (RCTs) when they are available. The EBM+ programme seeks to redress this imbalance, by suggesting methods for evaluating mechanistic studies alongside clinical studies. Drug approval is a problematic case for the view that mechanistic evidence should be taken into account, because RCTs are almost always available. Nevertheless, we argue that mechanistic evidence is central (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10.  19
    Experiment, Downward Causation, and Interventionist Levels of Explanation.Veli-Pekka Parkkinen - 2016 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 30 (3):245-261.
    This article considers interventionist arguments for downward causation and non-fundamental level causal explanation from the point of view of inferring causation from experiments. Several authors have utilised the interventionist theory of causal explanation to argue that the causal exclusion argument is moot and that higher-level as well as downward causation is real. I show that this argument can be made when levels are understood as levels of grain, leaving us with a choice between causal explanations pitched at different levels. Causal (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11.  7
    Are Model Organisms Theoretical Models?Veli-Pekka Parkkinen - 2017 - Disputatio 9 (47):471-498.
    This article compares the epistemic roles of theoretical models and model organisms in science, and specifically the role of non-human animal models in biomedicine. Much of the previous literature on this topic shares an assumption that animal models and theoretical models have a broadly similar epistemic role—that of indirect representation of a target through the study of a surrogate system. Recently, Levy and Currie have argued that model organism research and theoretical modelling differ in the justification of model-to-target inferences, such (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark