Relation of probability of causation to relative risk and doubling dose: a methodologic error that has become a social problem.
S. Greenland. American journal of public health, 89 (8):
1166-9(August 1999)2828<m:linebreak></m:linebreak>Risc atribuïble.
Abstract
Epidemiologists, biostatisticians, and health physicists frequently serve as expert consultants to lawyers, courts, and administrators. One of the most common errors committed by experts is to equate, without qualification, the attributable fraction estimated from epidemiologic data to the probability of causation requested by courts and administrators. This error has become so pervasive that it has been incorporated into judicial precedents and legislation. This commentary provides a brief overview of the error and the context in which it arises.
%0 Journal Article
%1 Greenland1999
%A Greenland, S
%D 1999
%J American journal of public health
%K Causality EnvironmentalExposure EnvironmentalExposure:adverseeffects Epidemiology Epidemiology:legislation&jurisprudence ExpertTestimony Female Humans MiddleAged RadiationInjuries RadiationInjuries:complications Risk ThyroidNeoplasms ThyroidNeoplasms:epidemiology ThyroidNeoplasms:etiology
%N 8
%P 1166-9
%T Relation of probability of causation to relative risk and doubling dose: a methodologic error that has become a social problem.
%U http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1508676&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract
%V 89
%X Epidemiologists, biostatisticians, and health physicists frequently serve as expert consultants to lawyers, courts, and administrators. One of the most common errors committed by experts is to equate, without qualification, the attributable fraction estimated from epidemiologic data to the probability of causation requested by courts and administrators. This error has become so pervasive that it has been incorporated into judicial precedents and legislation. This commentary provides a brief overview of the error and the context in which it arises.
@article{Greenland1999,
abstract = {Epidemiologists, biostatisticians, and health physicists frequently serve as expert consultants to lawyers, courts, and administrators. One of the most common errors committed by experts is to equate, without qualification, the attributable fraction estimated from epidemiologic data to the probability of causation requested by courts and administrators. This error has become so pervasive that it has been incorporated into judicial precedents and legislation. This commentary provides a brief overview of the error and the context in which it arises.},
added-at = {2023-02-03T11:44:35.000+0100},
author = {Greenland, S},
biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/28489f9880b9484ce85a8f999be901f2b/jepcastel},
interhash = {cdfedc369a9e38b6daa46d3c2706b7b6},
intrahash = {8489f9880b9484ce85a8f999be901f2b},
issn = {0090-0036},
journal = {American journal of public health},
keywords = {Causality EnvironmentalExposure EnvironmentalExposure:adverseeffects Epidemiology Epidemiology:legislation&jurisprudence ExpertTestimony Female Humans MiddleAged RadiationInjuries RadiationInjuries:complications Risk ThyroidNeoplasms ThyroidNeoplasms:epidemiology ThyroidNeoplasms:etiology},
month = {8},
note = {2828<m:linebreak></m:linebreak>Risc atribuïble},
number = 8,
pages = {1166-9},
pmid = {10432900},
timestamp = {2023-02-03T11:44:35.000+0100},
title = {Relation of probability of causation to relative risk and doubling dose: a methodologic error that has become a social problem.},
url = {http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1508676&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract},
volume = 89,
year = 1999
}