On the notion of causality in medicine: addressing Austin Bradford Hill and John L. Mackie

Abstract

Almost 50 years ago appeared the seminal article by Austin Bradford Hill where he presented parameters for inferring causes from statistical associations, which became known as Hill's causal criteria. This was a milestone for the renewal of the idea of cause in medicine. Our article revisits his contribution in light of the ideas from the Australian philosopher John L. Mackie, whose important works on causality reached an audience distinct from Hill's. We suggest that both the British epidemiologist and the Australian philosopher share the purpose of articulating probabilistic determinism and multi-causality, the first with a predominantly probabilistic model and the second with an analytical approach. This article explores the possible consequences of addressing these authors jointly in regard to causal inferences in medicine, especially in respect to mental disorders.Araújo LFSC, et al. / Rev Psiq Clín. 2014;41(2):56-61 Keywords: Causality, mental disorders, schizophrenia, Alzheimer's disease. ResumoHá quase 50 anos era publicado o artigo seminal de Austin Bradford Hill, no qual ele apresenta parâmetros para inferência de causas com base em associações estatísticas, que ficaram conhecidas como critérios causais de Hill. Aquele foi um marco para a renovação da ideia de causa na medicina. Nosso trabalho revisita suas ideias, articulando-as com o trabalho do filósofo australiano John L. Mackie, também autor de importante obra sobre causalidade, mas que teve uma audiência distinta da que Hill alcançou. Sugerimos que tanto o epidemiologista britânico quanto o filósofo australiano têm em comum o fato de que ambos procuram articular determinismo probabilístico e multicausalidade, o primeiro com um modelo predominantemente probabilista e o segundo com uma abordagem analítica. Este artigo explora as possíveis consequências da aproximação desses dois autores no que diz respeito a inferências causais na medicina, com foco particular nos transtornos mentais.Araújo LFSC, et al. / Rev Psiq Clín. 2014;41(2):56-61 Palavras-chave: Causalidade, transtornos mentais, esquizofrenia, doença de Alzheimer.

Exploring the Etiological Links behind Neurodegenerative Diseases: Inflammatory Cytokines and Bioactive Kynurenines

“…In search of a cause of multifactorial NDs, multi-causality and probabilistic determinism elaborated classical causal criteria which evidence a relationship between a presumed cause and an observed effect [167]. Analytical approximation further contributes to the better understanding of a role of medical statistics in a causal relationship [168]. Incorporation of a reference case may ease reaching an interpretation of meaningful comparisons by integrating standardization [169].…”

The Role of Dementia as Cause of Death: Certifiers’ Opinions versus Automated Coding

“…A counterfactual points out a causal connection because it transcends the empirical point of view. It uncovers a general law connecting individual events on rational grounds suiting the concept of causality [18, 19]. The certifier should try to answer the question: “Would the patient have died if the dementia would not have been present” (counterfactual).…”

Causalidade e Fonoaudiologia: abordagem epidemiológica

“…The association does not imply a causality relationship, although there are several historical attempts to equalize the two concepts (17) . The probabilistic deterministic view of causality is the Authors (year, country) Objective Theoretical conception Applied study Main discussion Cox (1992) (31) ; Inglaterra…”

“…Causality theory and causality model Hill (1965) (34) ; USA understanding that statistics may or may not offer, connected to concepts such as strength, consistency, plausibility and specificity, approximation with analytical philosophy, and contributing to a better understanding of causal relationships (17) , that is, to identify that A causes B, A must exist before B, and for B to occur, A must be present before B; and in the absence of A, B does not occur, and there is some plausibility within existing knowledge that explains that A causes B. An association indicates that A is associated with B, but there is no cause determination or indication if A or B happened before.…”