Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-59b7f5684b-b2xwp Total loading time: 0.246 Render date: 2022-10-05T00:14:15.035Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "displayNetworkTab": true, "displayNetworkMapGraph": true, "useSa": true } hasContentIssue true

Article contents

An Elusive Evidence Base: The Construction and Governance of Randomized Controlled Trials

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2007

Ayo Wahlberg
Affiliation:
BIOS, LSE, Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE, UK E-mail: a.j.wahlberg@lse.ac.uk
Linsey McGoey
Affiliation:
BIOS, LSE, Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE, UK E-mail: a.j.wahlberg@lse.ac.uk
Get access

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © London School of Economics and Political Science 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Armitage, P. (1995). Before and after Bradford Hill: Some trends in medical statistics. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 158, 143153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, D. (2002). Clinical autonomy, individual and collective: The problem of changing doctors' behaviour. Social Science & Medicine, 55, 17711777.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ashcroft, R. (2004). Current epistemological problems in evidence-based medicine. Journal of Medical Ethics, 30, 131135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berg, M. (1995). Turning a practice into a science: Reconceptualizing postwar medical practice. Social Studies of Science, 25, 437476.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chalmers, I. (1990). Underreporting research is scientific misconduct. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263, 14051408.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chalmers, I., Hedges, L., & Cooper, H. (2002). A brief history of research synthesis. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 25, 1237.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cochrane, A. (1972). Effectiveness and efficiency: Random reflections of health services. London: Nuffield Provincial Hospitals Trust.Google Scholar
Cochrane, A. (1987). Cochrane in conversation with Max Blythe at Rhoose Farm, South Wales. Interview transcript, Medical Science Video Archive MSVA 024. Royal College of Physicians and Oxford Brookes University.Google Scholar
Corrigan, O.P. (2002). ‘First in man’: The politics and ethics of women in clinical drug trials. Feminist Review, 72, 4072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daly, J., Willis, K., Small, R., Green, J., Welch, N., Kealy, M. et al. (2006). A hierarchy of evidence for assessing qualitative health research. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60, 4349.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dehue, T. (2002). A Dutch treat: Randomized controlled experimentation and the case of heroin-maintenance in the Netherlands. History of the Human Sciences, 15, 7598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doll, R. (2003). Fisher and Bradford Hill: Their personal impact. International Journal of Epidemiology, 32, 929931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, K.W. (2003). Ethics and evidence-based medicine. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.Google Scholar
Healy, D. (2001). The dilemma posed by new and fashionable treatments. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 7, 322327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jørgensen, A.W., Hilden, J., & Gøtzsche, P.C. (2006). Cochrane reviews compared with industry supported meta-analyses and other meta-analyses of the same drugs: Systematic review. British Medical Journal, 333, 782.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaptchuk, T. (1998a). Intentional ignorance: A history of blind assessment and placebo controls in medicine. Bulletin of the History of Medicine, 72, 389433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaptchuk, T. (1998b). Powerful placebo: The dark side of the randomised control trial. The Lancet, 351, 17221725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Littlefield, A.M. (1982). Ceteris paribus: The evolution of the clinical trial. Bulletin of the History of Medicine, spring, 1–18.Google Scholar
Marks, H. (1997) The progress of experiment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
May, C. (2006). Mobilising modern facts: Health technology assessment and the politics of evidence. Sociology of Health and Illness, 28, 513532.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moncrieff, J., & Cohen, D. (2004). Rethinking models of psychotropic drug action. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 970, 145153.Google Scholar
Mykhalovskiy, E., & Weir, L. (2004). The problem of evidence-based medicine: Directions for social science. Social Science & Medicine, 59, 10591069.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nguyen, V.-K. (2005). Antitretroviral globalism, biopolitics and therapeutic citizenship. In Ong, A., & Collier, S.J. (Eds), Global assemblages: Technology, politics, and ethics as anthropological problems. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Petryna, A. (2005). Drug development and the ethics of the globalized clinical trial. Working Paper, School of Social Science (New School for Social Research), Princeton, NJ, October.Google Scholar
Rees, W.L. (1997). The place of controlled trials in the development of psychopharmacology. History of Psychiatry, 8, 120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, N. (1999). Governing the soul: The shaping of the private self. London: Free Association Books.Google Scholar
Sackett, D. (1996). Evidence based medicine: What it is and what it isn’t. British Medical Journal, 312, 7172.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Timmermans, S., & Berg, M. (2003). The gold standard: The challenge of evidence-based medicine and standardization in health care. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Vandenbroucke, J. (2002). The history of confounding. History of Epidemiology, 47, 216224.Google ScholarPubMed

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

An Elusive Evidence Base: The Construction and Governance of Randomized Controlled Trials
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

An Elusive Evidence Base: The Construction and Governance of Randomized Controlled Trials
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

An Elusive Evidence Base: The Construction and Governance of Randomized Controlled Trials
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *