We recently produced another video series as part of our pathways to impact. Like Evidence-based medicine (EBM) itself, this production has its own backstory which is certainly worth telling.
Author: Charlie Norell
Precision (aka personalized) medicine (PM) describes prevention, diagnosis and treatment strategies that take into account the variability in genes, environment and lifestyle for each individual. While PM having already made an impressive impact on some fields of medicine, particularly oncology, the epistemology of precision medicine and its relationship to evidence-based medicine (EBM) has not received much attention.
This week Veli-Pekka Parkkinen and I are were observing the IARC-monographs meeting on benzene in Lyon. These meetings last eight days (and nights) and aim to evaluate the evidence for the claim that benzene causes cancer. Participants are world-leading experts in the relevant areas. During the meeting they build four subgroups: Exposure, cancer in humans, cancer in animals, mechanisms and other relevant data. After evaluating their respective evidence, they meet in plenary to come to an overall conclusion by aggregating their subgroup conclusions.
The Reasoner is a monthly digest highlighting exciting new research on reasoning, inference and method broadly construed. It is interdisciplinary, covering research in, e.g., philosophy, logic, AI, statistics, cognitive science, law, psychology, mathematics and the sciences. Each month, there is a column on Evidence-Based Medicine. Here is this month’s column: Testing Surgical Interventions for Breast Cancer.
In any introductory course in philosophy of science we ask the question whether philosophy of science should be normative or descriptive. This question has a history of its own, which also influenced what has become the ‘mainstream’ in philosophy of science, and that marked a difference between philosophy of science on the one hand and the social studies of science on the other hand.