Amazing, but this 1997 paper already shows what (and why) we can learn from observational studies about the bounds of treatment effects in a randomized experiment marred by non-compliance👇🏻The rest is just a history of the neglect by the EBM promoters. #causaltwitter
Glad you mentioned "non-compliance". Indeed, this was one of the first tasks addressed and solved in do-calculus. See ucla.in/2pQ0Gvr. The paper also includes applications to real-life data -- pacifying those who claim such applications are missing from CI literature.
Yes, it's a good paper. Alex Balke was one of my best students, and this paper was part of his PhD dissertation. Too bad he did not go to academia.
It continues to amaze me how much we had by 1997, when I started at Queen's, yet we still haven’t used in 2023. Have these 3 decades been spent on coming to terms (as if it wasn't known before) that EBM truthers and their truth container can't compete with the scientific method?
I haven't hears about EBM until few weeks ago, except (so I thought) as a self-promoting adjective. I didn't realize some consider it to be a methodology. Wikipedia surprised me.
Evidence-Based Medicine, they call it. A methodology, they are neuro-linguistically programming us. But I have to ask, which scientific discipline exactly begets this methodology? And if there were such, how would that be consistent with EBM's own principles?
United States 趋势
- 1. #SmackDown 14K posts
- 2. Arch Manning 1,960 posts
- 3. Texas A&M 9,644 posts
- 4. #BedBathandBeyondisBack 1,380 posts
- 5. Bears 126K posts
- 6. Eagles 140K posts
- 7. Sark 2,297 posts
- 8. #OPLive 1,508 posts
- 9. Marcel Reed 1,621 posts
- 10. #iufb 2,292 posts
- 11. Aggies 4,916 posts
- 12. Ben Johnson 26.9K posts
- 13. #HookEm 3,847 posts
- 14. Wingo 1,736 posts
- 15. Lindor 1,793 posts
- 16. Jalen 33.7K posts
- 17. Bucks 18.4K posts
- 18. Jeff Sims N/A
- 19. Purdue 5,272 posts
- 20. Longhorns 3,350 posts
Something went wrong.
Something went wrong.