scholarly journals Reducing Death from Melanoma and Standards of Evidence

2012 ◽  
Vol 132 (5) ◽  
pp. 1311-1312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin A. Weinstock
Keyword(s):  
Standards Of Evidence

Holding replication studies to mainstream standards of evidence

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Duane T. Wegener ◽  
Leandre R. Fabrigar
Keyword(s):  
Replication Studies ◽  
Replication Research ◽  
Standards Of Evidence ◽  
Do So

AbstractReplications can make theoretical contributions, but are unlikely to do so if their findings are open to multiple interpretations (especially violations of psychometric invariance). Thus, just as studies demonstrating novel effects are often expected to empirically evaluate competing explanations, replications should be held to similar standards. Unfortunately, this is rarely done, thereby undermining the value of replication research.

Inside the Enemy's Computer

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clement Guitton
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Technical Problem ◽  
Technical Information ◽  
Cyber Attack ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Private Companies ◽  
Political Issues ◽  
Current Thinking ◽  
Standards Of Evidence

Attribution — tracing those responsible for a cyber attack — is of primary importance when classifying it as a criminal act, an act of war, or an act of terrorism. Three assumptions dominate current thinking: attribution is a technical problem; it is unsolvable; and it is unique. Approaching attribution as a problem forces us to consider it either as solved or unsolved. Yet attribution is far more nuanced, and is best approached as a process in constant flux, driven by judicial and political pressures. In the criminal context, courts must assess the guilt of criminals, mainly based on technical evidence. In the national security context, decision-makers must analyze unreliable and mainly non-technical information in order to identify an enemy of the state. Attribution in both contexts is political: in criminal cases, laws reflect society’s prevailing norms and powers; in national security cases, attribution reflects a state’s will to maintain, increase or assert its power. However, both processes differ on many levels. The constraints, which reflect common aspects of many other political issues, constitute the structure of the book: the need for judgment calls, the role of private companies, the standards of evidence, the role of time, and the plausible deniability of attacks.

A Call for Higher Standards of Evidence for Dietary Guidelines

2008 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 234-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul R. Marantz ◽  
Elizabeth D. Bird ◽  
Michael H. Alderman
Keyword(s):  
Dietary Guidelines ◽  
Standards Of Evidence

scholarly journals Social Impact Archaeology: Pontefract Castle and the Gatehouse Project

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brendon Wilkins
Keyword(s):  
Social Impact ◽  
Social Values ◽  
Theory Of Change ◽  
The Public ◽  
Evidence Framework ◽  
Standards Of Evidence ◽  
Professional Field ◽  
Collaborative Platform ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

Archaeology is said to add value to development, creating a deeper sense of place, community identity as well as improving health and wellbeing. Accentuating these wider social values has been welcomed by a profession keen to broaden its public relevance and legitimacy and protect its seat at the table in modern cultural life, but how much, if at all, do the public actually benefit from developer-led archaeology? Benefits to individuals and communities from archaeology projects are often abstract, intangible and difficult to attribute, and the discipline arguably lacks a satisfactory frame of reference around which it can express and design for these additional social values. Drawing on the language of social impact investing, this article will explore how the UK-based collaborative platform, DigVentures, has addressed this challenge. It introduces a 'Theory of Change' and 'Standards of Evidence' framework to account for the impact of development-led archaeology programmes, illustrating the causal links between activity and change through the case of the Pontefract Castle Gatehouse Project. It is complemented by a short documentary film exploring the spectrum of digital and physical opportunities for participation by the public alongside a team of highly experienced professional field archaeologists, demonstrating how development-led archaeology can be designed to accomplish far more than answer a planning brief.

scholarly journals Contrasting Medical and Legal Standards of Evidence: A Precision Medicine Case Study

2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 194-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary E. Marchant ◽  
Kathryn Scheckel ◽  
Doug Campos-Outcalt
Keyword(s):  
Precision Medicine ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Large Body ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Genetic Profile ◽  
Legal Standards ◽  
Standards Of Evidence ◽  
The Individual

As the health care system transitions to a precision medicine approach that tailors clinical care to the genetic profile of the individual patient, there is a potential tension between the clinical uptake of new technologies by providers and the legal system's expectation of the standard of care in applying such technologies. We examine this tension by comparing the type of evidence that physicians and courts are likely to rely on in determining a duty to recommend pharmacogenetic testing of patients prescribed the oral anti-coagulant drug warfarin. There is a large body of inconsistent evidence and factors for and against such testing, but physicians and courts are likely to weigh this evidence differently. The potential implications for medical malpractice risk are evaluated and discussed.

Medical Cosmopolitanism

2019 ◽  
pp. 181-208
Author(s):  
Alex Broadbent
Keyword(s):  
First Principles ◽  
Epistemic Relativism ◽  
Epistemic Humility ◽  
Standards Of Evidence ◽  
Realist View

This chapter seeks an attitude to medicine that does not commit the error of EBM in committing to an unjustifiably rigid notion of evidence, nor the reaction of Medical Nihilism of adopting EBM’s standards of evidence and then raising the bar even higher. Cosmopolitanism is a position developed by Appiah in the context of ethical disagreement, designed to facilitate conversation without falling into epistemic relativism. The chapter unpacks Cosmopolitanism into four stances: metaphysical, epistemic, moral, and practical. It applies these stances to medicine to yield Medical Cosmopolitanism. On this realist view, medical facts (e.g., whether an intervention works, whether someone is sick) are not dependent on the perceiver. Nonetheless Cosmopolitanism promotes epistemic humility: the attitude that one has limited confidence in one’s medical beliefs (both of efficacy and of the inefficacy of someone else’s favored intervention). And it promotes Primacy of Practice: settle cases first, principles later.

Relation between serum and whole-blood ethanol concentrations

1993 ◽  
Vol 39 (11) ◽  
pp. 2288-2292 ◽  
Author(s):  
P M Rainey
Keyword(s):  
Whole Blood ◽  
Concentration Ratio ◽  
Blood Alcohol Concentration ◽  
Alcohol Concentration ◽  
Blood Alcohol ◽  
Legal Standards ◽  
Standards Of Evidence ◽  
Parametric Calculation ◽  
Concentration Ratios ◽  
Normally Distributed

Abstract An algorithm is suggested for interpretation of serum ethanol concentrations under legal statutes that specify whole-blood alcohol concentrations. The algorithm uses the distribution of individual serum:whole-blood alcohol concentration ratios to allow calculations at various levels of confidence that can be related to legal standards of evidence. Serum:whole-blood alcohol concentration ratios were determined for 211 patients. The ratios ranged from 0.88 to 1.59 (median 1.15). The distribution of ratios was positively skewed, but the logarithms of the ratios were normally distributed. This allowed the parametric calculation of a range of ratios of 0.90-1.49 for the central 99% of the population and a range of 0.95-1.40 for the central 95%. The serum:whole-blood alcohol concentration ratio was independent of both the serum alcohol concentration (R2 = 0.005) and the hematocrit (R2 = 0.03).

scholarly journals Transgender adolescents and genital-alignment surgery: Is age restriction justified?

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 94-103
Author(s):  
Edmund Horowicz
Keyword(s):  
Young People ◽  
Clinical Guidelines ◽  
Gender Dysphoria ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Cultural Norms ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Professional Issues ◽  
Standards Of Evidence ◽  
Current Concerns ◽  
Evidence Based Care

In the case of controversial interventions there is a need for clinical guidelines to be founded on ‘expert opinion’ and an evidence base, in order to minimise individual clinicians making subjective decisions influenced by bias or cultural norms. This paper considers international clinical guidelines that through recommendation effectively prohibit the provision of genital-alignment surgery for competent adolescents with gender dysphoria. I argue that although the rationale for this particular guideline is based on serious concerns, these need to be better understood to allow reconsideration of this unilateral prohibitive recommendation. I do not propose that genital-alignment surgery should be prima-facia provided for any adolescent with gender dysphoria. Instead I argue that by developing our understanding of the current concerns, we can allow guidelines to incorporate a margin of clinical discretion, to allow clinicians to provide genital-alignment surgery to some adolescents, where clinically appropriate. In facilitating this we can move towards establishing a solid evidence-base. The basis of this position is that clinical guidelines and medical practice should treat these young people with the same standards of evidence-based care as others who have less controversial conditions. Whilst this paper uses English law and UK professional regulation for context, many of the ethical, legal and professional issues highlighted are applicable to other jurisdictions.

How/Should We Generalize?

2020 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 86-97
Author(s):  
Ansley T. Erickson
Keyword(s):  
Local Level ◽  
National Context ◽  
Historical Knowledge ◽  
History Of ◽  
Standards Of Evidence ◽  
Western European ◽  
Eighteenth And Nineteenth Centuries ◽  
National Borders

In Carl Kaestle's 1992 essay “Standards of Evidence,” generalization is how we know when we know. Kaestle sketches a model of increasing certainty in historical claims as they are developed and refined at increasing scales of research, from local to international. A historical claim might originate in the study of a particular place or case, but to know that the claims were true, the historian needed to move from the microlevel view to a more macro one, perhaps at the national rather than local level. Once tested and refined through comparison with other cases, possibly smoothing some of the rougher edges in the process, the claim could then be transferred beyond national borders. When a historical claim is polished enough to fit other contexts, we know it is true. Kaestle illustrates this increasing certainty through increasing scale with reference to the history of literacy and, more specifically, to scholarship on how Western European and US industrialization shaped literacy rates. Bringing studies from various locales into connection, and then comparing these cases with the national context, Kaestle summarizes that it was the commercial processes of urbanization, rather than industrialization itself, that helped produce rising literacy in the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries. Generalization at greater scale becomes not only the means through which to claim the value of historical work, but the basis for constructing historical knowledge in the first place.

STANDARDS OF EVIDENCE

2007 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 483-492 ◽  
Author(s):  
KIM STEVEN HUNT
Keyword(s):  
Standards Of Evidence
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document