Bureaucrats, Comment administrators, editor, Interface administrators, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Suppressors, Administrators, Widget editors
11,019
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Mercuri and Barseghyan (2019) (view source)
Revision as of 19:14, 25 January 2020
, 19:14, 25 January 2020no edit summary
|Author=Mathew Mercuri, Hakob Barseghyan,
|Year=2019
|Abstract=Accumulating evidence from diverse fields of inquiry suggests the existence of ''method hierarchies'', where criteria employed by the same epistemic agent constitute a certain preference hierarchy. In this paper, we illustrate the phenomenon of method hierarchy by discussing several prominent studies in clinical epidemiology of coronary artery disease. The current “gold standard” in clinical epidemiology is the randomized controlled trial (RCT) method. Yet, in the absence of studies that satisfy the strict requirement of the RCT method, clinical epidemiologists often relax the requirements of double-blinding, complete follow-up, no treatment switching, and/or randomization. Instead, they sometimes employ less stringent requirements, such as the requirement to account for the potential imbalances between groups through statistical models. This suggests the existence of a certain method hierarchy. However, it is unclear how method hierarchies are to be conceptualized and documented. Specifically, it remains to be seen whether a method hierarchy is best understood as being composed of individual employed methods or as a single composite method with a complex system of ''if''-s and ''else''-s.|URL=https://scientojournal.com/index.php/scientonomy/article/view/33559|DOI=10.33137/js.v3i0.33559|Page Status=StubNeeds Editing
|Journal=[[Journal of Scientonomy|Scientonomy]]
|Volume=3
|Pages=forthcoming45-61
}}
