On ideals of objectivity, judgments, and bias in medical research - A comment on Stegenga

Jukola S (2017)
STUDIES IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE PART C-STUDIES IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF BIOLOGICAL AND BIOMEDIAL SCIENCES 62: 35-41.

Download
Es wurde kein Volltext hochgeladen. Nur Publikationsnachweis!
Zeitschriftenaufsatz | Veröffentlicht | Englisch
Abstract / Bemerkung
By using Stegenga's article Is meta-analysis the platinum standard of evidence as a case study, this paper shows how different notions of objectivity can affect discussions concerning medical research. I argue that the ideal of objectivity that underlies Stegenga's article is both unattainable in practice and insufficient and unnecessary in principle to capture some of the ways in which biases may enter medical knowledge production. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Erscheinungsjahr
Zeitschriftentitel
STUDIES IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE PART C-STUDIES IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF BIOLOGICAL AND BIOMEDIAL SCIENCES
Band
62
Seite
35-41
ISSN
eISSN
PUB-ID

Zitieren

Jukola S. On ideals of objectivity, judgments, and bias in medical research - A comment on Stegenga. STUDIES IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE PART C-STUDIES IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF BIOLOGICAL AND BIOMEDIAL SCIENCES. 2017;62:35-41.
Jukola, S. (2017). On ideals of objectivity, judgments, and bias in medical research - A comment on Stegenga. STUDIES IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE PART C-STUDIES IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF BIOLOGICAL AND BIOMEDIAL SCIENCES, 62, 35-41. doi:10.1016/j.shpsc.2017.02.001
Jukola, S. (2017). On ideals of objectivity, judgments, and bias in medical research - A comment on Stegenga. STUDIES IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE PART C-STUDIES IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF BIOLOGICAL AND BIOMEDIAL SCIENCES 62, 35-41.
Jukola, S., 2017. On ideals of objectivity, judgments, and bias in medical research - A comment on Stegenga. STUDIES IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE PART C-STUDIES IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF BIOLOGICAL AND BIOMEDIAL SCIENCES, 62, p 35-41.
S. Jukola, “On ideals of objectivity, judgments, and bias in medical research - A comment on Stegenga”, STUDIES IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE PART C-STUDIES IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF BIOLOGICAL AND BIOMEDIAL SCIENCES, vol. 62, 2017, pp. 35-41.
Jukola, S.: On ideals of objectivity, judgments, and bias in medical research - A comment on Stegenga. STUDIES IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE PART C-STUDIES IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF BIOLOGICAL AND BIOMEDIAL SCIENCES. 62, 35-41 (2017).
Jukola, Saana. “On ideals of objectivity, judgments, and bias in medical research - A comment on Stegenga”. STUDIES IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE PART C-STUDIES IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF BIOLOGICAL AND BIOMEDIAL SCIENCES 62 (2017): 35-41.

38 References

Daten bereitgestellt von Europe PubMed Central.

Publication bias: A problem in interpreting medical data
Begg, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (Statistics in Society) 151(3), 1988
Gender differences in multiple-choice tests: the role of differential guessing tendencies
Ben-Shakhar, Journal of Educational Measurement 28(1), 1991
Lessons from the vioxx Debacle: What the privatization of science can teach us about social epistemology
Biddle, Social Epistemology 21(1), 2007

Bloor, 1997

Broadbent, 2013
Is stability a stable category in medical epistemology?
Broadbent, Angewandte Philosophie 2(1), 2015
Values in science beyond underdetermination and inductive risk
Brown, Philosophy of Science 80(5), 2013
Research under Pressure: Methodological features of commercialized science
Carrier, 2010

Daston, 2007
Inductive risk and values in science
Douglas, Philosophy of Science 67(), 2000
The irreducible complexity of objectivity
Douglas, Synthese 138(), 2004

Douglas, 2009
Association between suicide attempts and selective serotonin reuptake Inhibitors: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials
Fergusson, British Medical Journal 330(), 2005
Publishing as Prostitution? Choosing between One's own ideas and academic success
Frey, Public Choice 116(), 2003
Let's not talk about objectivity
Hacking, 2015

Howick, 2011
Why most published research findings are false
Ioannidis, PloS Medicine 2(8), 2005

Jukola, 2015

Kitcher, 1993

Kripke, 1982
Bias in peer review. Advances in information science
Lee, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64(1), 2013

Longino, 1990
Industry-sponsorship and research outcome
Lundh, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 12(), 2012
Efficacy and effectiveness of Antidepressants: Current status of research
Pigott, Psychotherapy & Psychosomatics 79(), 2010
The age-old struggle against the antivaccinationists.
Poland GA, Jacobson RM., N. Engl. J. Med. 364(2), 2011
PMID: 21226573

Porter, 1997
Biomedical research, neglected disease, and well-ordered science
Reiss, Theoria 66(), 2009
Publication ethics and the ghost management of medical publication.
Sismondo S, Doucet M., Bioethics 24(6), 2009
PMID: 19222451
Is meta-analysis the platinum standard of evidence?
Stegenga J., Stud Hist Philos Biol Biomed Sci 42(4), 2011
PMID: 22035723
Measuring effectiveness.
Stegenga J., Stud Hist Philos Biol Biomed Sci 54(), 2015
PMID: 26199055

Tabery, 2014
Benefits and risks of drug treatments. How to combine the best evidence on benefits with the best data about adverse effects
Vandenbroucke, JAMA 300(20), 2006
Bias and values in scientific research
Wilholt, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 40(), 2009
Epistemic trust in science
Wilholt, The British Journal for the Philosophy of the Science 64(2), 2013

Ziman, 2000

Export

Markieren/ Markierung löschen
Markierte Publikationen

Open Data PUB

Web of Science

Dieser Datensatz im Web of Science®

Quellen

PMID: 28188111
PubMed | Europe PMC

Suchen in

Google Scholar