Real and Virtual Clinical Trials: A Formal Analysis.
If well-designed, the results of a Randomised Clinical Trial (RCT) can justify a causal claim between treatment and effect in the study population; however, additional information might be needed to carry over this result to another population. RCTs have been criticized exactly on grounds of failing...
| Published in: | Topoi: An International Review of Philosophy Vol. 38; no. 2; pp. 411 - 423 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , |
| Format: | Article |
| Published: |
Springer Nature
Jun2019
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | View this record in EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=136648687&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 136648687 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 01677411 NM2 jtl: Topoi: An International Review of Philosophy issn: 01677411 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Jun2019 vid: 38 iid: 2 pid: 237 pub: Springer Nature artinfo: ui: 136648687 10.1007/s11245-018-9563-3 ppf: 411 ppct: 12 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 1.1MB tig: atl: Real and Virtual Clinical Trials: A Formal Analysis. aug: au: Osimani, Barbara Bertolaso, Marta Poellinger, Roland Frontoni, Emanuele affil: Logic and Philosophy of Science, Department of Biomedical Sciences and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Tronto 10, Torrette, 60126, Ancona, Italy Philosophy of Science, Faculty of Engineering, Institute of Philosophy of Scientific and Technological Practice, Università Campus Bio-Medico di Roma, Via Alvaro del Portillo, 21, 00128, Roma, Italy Munich Center for Mathematical Philosophy, Fakultät für Philosophie, Wissenschaftstheorie und Religionswissenschaft, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Ludwigstr. 31, 80539, Munich, Germany Foundations of Informatics and Computer Vision, Department of Information Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Brecce Bianche, 1, 60131, Ancona, Italy su: Interpolation Extrapolation Electrophysiology Theory of knowledge Randomized controlled trials Simulation methods & models sug: subj: Interpolation Extrapolation Electrophysiology Theory of knowledge Randomized controlled trials Simulation methods & models keyword: Computational modeling and simulation External validity In Silico Clinical Trials Randomised Clinical Trials ab: If well-designed, the results of a Randomised Clinical Trial (RCT) can justify a causal claim between treatment and effect in the study population; however, additional information might be needed to carry over this result to another population. RCTs have been criticized exactly on grounds of failing to provide this sort of information (Cartwright and Stegenga, in: Dawid, Twining, Vasilaki (eds) Evidence, inference and enquiry. Oxford University Press, New York, 2011), as well as to black-box important details regarding the mechanisms underpinning the causal law instantiated by the RCT result. On the other side, so-called In Silico Clinical Trials (ISCTs) face the same criticisms addressed against standard modelling and simulation techniques, and cannot be equated to experiments (see, e.g.; Boem and Ratti in: Boniolo, Nathan (eds) Philosophy of molecular medicine: foundational issues in research and practice, Routledge, New York, 2017; Parker in Synthese 169(3):483–496, 2009; Parke in Philos Sci 81(4):516–536, 2014; Diez Roux in Am J Epidemiol 181(2):100–102, 2015 and related discussions in Frigg and Reiss in Synthese 169(3):593–613, 2009; Winsberg in Synthese 169(3):575–592, 2009; Beisbart and Norton in Int Stud Philos Sci 26(4):403–422, 2012). We undertake a formal analysis of both methods in order to identify their distinct contribution to causal inference in the clinical setting. Britton et al.'s study (Proc Natl Acad Sci 110(23):E2098–E2105, 2013) on the impact of ion current variability on cardiac electrophysiology is used for illustrative purposes. We deduce that, by predicting variability through interpolation, ISCTs aid with problems regarding extrapolation of RCTs results, and therefore in assessing their external validity. Furthermore, ISCTs can be said to encode "thick" causal knowledge (knowledge about the biological mechanisms underpinning the causal effects at the clinical level)—as opposed to "thin" difference-making information inferred from RCTs. Hence, ISCTs and RCTs cannot replace one another but rather, they are complementary in that the former provide information about the determinants of variability of causal effects, while the latter can, under certain conditions, establish causality in the first place. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Topoi: An International Review of Philosophy is a copyright of Springer, 2019. All Rights Reserved. item: Topoi: An International Review of Philosophy holder: Springer Nature dt: @attributes: year: 2019 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|