Meta-Research Evidence for Evaluating Therapies

Philosophy of Science 85 (5):767-780 (2018)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
The new field of meta-research investigates industry bias, publication bias, contradictions between studies, and other trends in medical research. I argue that its findings should be used as meta-evidence for evaluating therapies. ‘Meta-evidence’ is evidence about the support that direct ‘first-order evidence’ provides the hypothesis. I consider three objections to my proposal: the irrelevance objection, the screening-off objection, and the underdetermination objection. I argue that meta-research evidence works by rationally revising our confidence in first-order evidence and, consequently, in the hypothesis—typically, downward.
No keywords specified (fix it)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2018-12-19
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Bayesian Epistemology.Bovens, Luc & Hartmann, Stephan
Epistemic Akrasia.Horowitz, Sophie
Higher Order Evidence.Christensen, David
Respecting All the Evidence.Sliwa, Paulina & Horowitz, Sophie
Respecting the Evidence.Feldman, Richard

View all 7 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
242 ( #18,372 of 50,249 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
61 ( #9,111 of 50,249 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.