Cindy don't these correspond to Bradford Hill's Criteria of Causality (first
devised in 1937)?
See my site at:
http://www.shef.ac.uk/~scharr/ir/adept/aetiology/intro.htm
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cindy Farquhar" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 1:24 AM
Subject: Criteria or causality
> Dear All,
>
> I am writing about the assocation of uterine fibroids and infertility and
> was using the 9 criteria described by Sackett et al in Clinical
Epidemiology
> as the basis for the discussion. Does any one know if these have been
> further developed or written about in other places. That would be most
> useful.
>
> Here are the nine criteria for causality that I am using:
>
> Is there experimental evidence from human studies?
> Is the association strong?
> Is the association consistent from study to study?
> Is the temporal relationship correct?
> Is there a dose-response relationship?
> Does the association make epidemiological sense?
> Does the association make biological sense?
> Is the association specific?
> Is the association analogous to a previously proven causal association?
>
>
> Professor Cindy Farquhar
> Postgraduate Professor of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
> Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
> University of Auckland
> National Women's Hospital
> +64 9 6309943 ext 4092 (secretary)
> Direct Dial +64 9 6236848
> Fax +64 9 6309858
>
> -
>
|