The use of mechanistic reasoning in assessing coronavirus interventions

Abstract

Evidence-based medicine (EBM), the dominant approach to assessing the effectiveness of clinical and public health interventions, focuses on the results of association studies. EBM+ is a development of EBM that systematically considers mechanistic studies alongside association studies. In this paper we provide several examples of the importance of mechanistic evidence to coronavirus research. (i) Assessment of combination therapy for MERS highlights the need for systematic assessment of mechanistic evidence. (ii) That hypertension is a risk factor for severe disease in the case of SARS-CoV-2 suggests that altering hypertension treatment might alleviate disease, but the mechanisms are complex, and it is essential to consider and evaluate multiple mechanistic hypotheses. (iii) To be confident that public health interventions will be effective requires a detailed assessment of social and psychological components of the mechanisms of their action, in addition to mechanisms of disease. (iv) In particular, if vaccination programmes are to be effective, they must be carefully tailored to the social context; again, mechanistic evidence is crucial. We conclude that coronavirus research is best situated within the EBM+ evaluation framework.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,793

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Mechanisms: what are they evidence for in evidence-based medicine?Holly Andersen - 2012 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 18 (5):992-999.
Negative mechanistic reasoning in medical intervention assessment.Jesper Jerkert - 2015 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 36 (6):425-437.
Evidence, illness, and causation: An epidemiological perspective on the Russo–Williamson Thesis.Alexander R. Fiorentino & Olaf Dammann - 2015 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 54:1-9.
Mechanisms in clinical practice: use and justification.Mark R. Tonelli & Jon Williamson - 2020 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 23 (1):115-124.
Philosophical Issues in Medical Intervention Research.Jesper Jerkert - 2015 - Dissertation, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm
The feasibility and malleability of EBM+.Jon Williamson - 2020 - Theoria. An International Journal for Theory, History and Foundations of Science 36 (2):191-209.

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-11-12

Downloads
3 (#1,905,043)

6 months
3 (#1,498,119)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Jon Williamson
University of Manchester
Daniel Auker-Howlett
University of Kent (PhD)

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references