The relevance of the philosophy of Sir Karl Popper to the planning, conduct and analysis of clinical trials is examined. It is shown that blinding and randomization can only be regarded as valuable for the purpose of refuting universal hypotheses. The purpose of inclusion criteria is also examined. It is concluded that a misplaced belief in induction is responsible for many false notions regarding clinical trials.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stephen Senn (1991) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: