TY - BOOK ID - 65194982 TI - Evidence and Hypothesis in Clinical Medical Science PY - 2020 SN - 3030442705 3030442691 PB - Cham : Springer International Publishing : Imprint: Springer, DB - UniCat KW - Medicine KW - Medical ethics. KW - Philosophy. KW - Biomedical ethics KW - Clinical ethics KW - Ethics, Medical KW - Health care ethics KW - Medical care KW - Bioethics KW - Professional ethics KW - Nursing ethics KW - Social medicine KW - Health Workforce KW - Moral and ethical aspects KW - Medicine—Philosophy. KW - Research—Moral and ethical aspects. KW - Cancer research. KW - Philosophy of Medicine. KW - Research Ethics. KW - Theory of Medicine/Bioethics. KW - Cancer Research. KW - Cancer research UR - https://www.unicat.be/uniCat?func=search&query=sysid:65194982 AB - In this book, the author argues that no current philosophical theory of evidence in clinical medical science is adequate. None can accurately explain the way evidence is gathered and used to confirm hypotheses. To correct this, he proposes a new approach called the weight of evidence account. This innovative method supplies a satisfactory explanation and rationale for the “hierarchical pyramid” of evidence–based medicine, with randomized clinical trials and their derivatives, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews of randomized clinical trials at the top and case reports, case series, expert opinion, and the like at the bottom. The author illustrates the development of various “levels” of evidence by considering the evolution of less invasive surgical treatments for early breast cancer. He shows that the weight of evidence account explains the notion of levels of evidence and other efforts to rank them. In addition, he presents a defense of randomization as a method to maximize accuracy in the conduct of clinical trials. The title also considers ethical issues surrounding experimentation with medical therapies in human subjects. It illustrates and discusses these issues in studies of respiratory therapies in neonates and treatment for certain cancers in adults. The author shows that in many cases sufficient evidence can be accrued to warrant generally accepted new therapies without the need for evidence derived from randomized clinical trials. ER -