Major Greenwood and clinical trials

Farewell, Vern T.; Johnson, Tony

doi:10.1177/0141076817736028

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 38 publications

(45 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The concept of efficacy, moreover, is only conceivable within the broader medical statistics founded by Greenwood and his successors [33]. Moreover, studies into vaccine availability, already in the last century, have highlighted how the manner of presenting the data affects their interpretation [35].…”

Section: Repercussions Of the Mechanisms Of Reasoning On Vaccine Choicementioning

confidence: 99%

The Perception of the Effectiveness of Vaccines between Myth and Reality

Cecilia Jacomuzzi

2023

Epidemic Preparedness and Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The perception of the risk of a vaccine and its effectiveness has always been the subject of study. The human mind, in fact, tends to underestimate the effectiveness of a vaccine and overestimate its risk. But where does this problem come from and how does the human being think when he is talking about a vaccine? In this chapter, I intend to review the main studies on the efficacy of the vaccine. I also intend to deepen the studies on the perception of risk to highlight what are the strategies of thought adopted by the human beings when they must reason on these issues.

show abstract

Section: Repercussions Of the Mechanisms Of Reasoning On Vaccine Choicementioning

confidence: 99%

The Perception of the Effectiveness of Vaccines between Myth and Reality

Cecilia Jacomuzzi

2023

Epidemic Preparedness and Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Like Susser, Lilienfeld was a participant in World War II (US Army) [ 50 ]. It can be noted that the creators of the “epidemiology of the first generation” [ 61 ], Major Greenwood (1880–1949; medical service, then the British Army Ammunition Corps) [ 103 ] and A.B. Hill (UK pilot; see [ 2 ]), also were the veterans of war, but of the First World War.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Causal Criteria in Medical and Biological Disciplines: History, Essence, and Radiation Aspects. Report 4, Part 1: The Post-Hill Criteria and Ecolgoical Criteria

Koterov

Ushenkova

2022

Biol Bull Russ Acad Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Part 1 of Report 4 is focused on the development and modifications of causal criteria after A.B. Hill (1965). Criteria from B. MacMahon et al. (1970–1996), regarded as the first textbook for modern epidemiology, were considered, and it was found that the named researchers did not offer anything new despite the frequent mention of this source in relation to the theme. A similar situation emerged with the criteria of M. Susser: the three obligatory points of this author, “Association” (or “Probability” of causality), “Time order,” and “Direction of effect,” are trivial, and two more special criteria, which are the development of “Popperian Epidemiology,” i.e., “Surviability” of the hypothesis when it is tested by different methods (included in the refinement in Hill’s criterion “Consistency of association”) and “Predictive performance” of the hypothesis are more theoretical and hardly applicable for the practice of epidemiology and public health. The same restrictions apply to the similar “Popperian” criteria of D.L. Weed, “Predictability” and “Testability” of the causal hypothesis. Although the universal postulates of A.S. Evans for infectious and noninfectious pathologies can be considered exhaustive, they are not used either in epidemiology or in any other discipline practice, except for the field of infectious pathologies, which is probably explained by the complication of the ten-point complex. The little-known criteria of P. Cole (1997) for medical and forensic practice are the most important. The three parts of Hill’s criterion-based approaches are important in that they go from a single epidemiological study through a cycle of studies (coupled with the integration of data from other biomedical disciplines) to re-base Hill’s criteria for assessing the individual causality of an effect. These constructs complement the earlier guidance from R.E. Gots (1986) on establishing probabilistic personal causation. The collection of causal criteria and the guidelines for environmental disciplines (ecology of biota, human ecoepidemiology, and human ecotoxicology) were considered. The total dominance of inductive causal criteria, both initial and in modifications and with additions, was revealed for an apparently complete base of sources (1979–2020). Adaptations of all known causal schemes based on guidelines have been found, from Henle–Koch postulates to Hill and Susser, including in the international programs and practice of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The Hill Criteria are used by the WHO and other organizations on chemical safety (IPCS) to assess causality in animal experiments for subsequent extrapolation to humans. Data on the assessment of the causality of effects in ecology, ecoepidemiology, and ecotoxicology, together with the use of Hill’s criteria for animal experiments, are of significant relevance not only for radiation ecology, but also for radiobiology.

show abstract

“…Of the three Directors shown in Figure 2, Greenwood and Doll were medically qualified, Hill was not, but all three had some statistical background and understanding, all three were epidemiologists, and two, Hill and Doll were clinical trialists; Greenwood was not though he was an experimentalist. 9,12 Epidemiology and clinical trials constitute two of the main areas of activity within medical statistics as pointed out by Hill in his memorial lecture. Keating 11 actually goes further and even suggests an apostolic succession-perhaps the only one in British medical research-that started with Karl Pearson, who established the discipline of mathematical statistics at UCL, then passed to Major Greenwood, the first professor of epidemiology and vital statistics at LSHTM, to Hill, and subsequently to Doll.…”

Section: Sir Austin Bradford Hill Cbe Frs Phd Dsc (1897-1991)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Collectively Doll and Hill laid the basis for the explosive development of epidemiology by showing how the old science could be refurbished as a tool to discover the causes of non‐infectious diseases. Neither man knew it yet, but their subsequent collaborations ushered in a new era of research.” Of the three Directors shown in Figure 2, Greenwood and Doll were medically qualified, Hill was not, but all three had some statistical background and understanding, all three were epidemiologists, and two, Hill and Doll were clinical trialists; Greenwood was not though he was an experimentalist 9,12 . Epidemiology and clinical trials constitute two of the main areas of activity within medical statistics as pointed out by Hill in his memorial lecture.…”

Section: Sir Austin Bradford Hill Cbe Frs Phd Dsc (1897‐1991)mentioning

confidence: 99%