title: Randomized controlled trials versus rough set analysis: two competing approaches for evaluating clinical data.
abstract: The present paper deals with the problem of evaluating empirical evidence for therapeutic decisions in medicine. The article discusses the views of Nancy Cartwright and John Worrall on the function that randomization plays in ascertaining causal relations with reference to the therapies applied. The main purpose of the paper is to present a general idea of alternative method of evaluating empirical evidence. The method builds on data analysis that makes use of rough set theory. The first attempts to apply the method show that it is an interesting alternative to randomized controlled trials.
authors.affiliation: Department of Logic and Methodology of Science, Institute of Philosophy, University of A. Mickiewicz, ul. Szamarzewskiego 89c, 60-569, Poznan, Poland, rzepinskit@wp.pl.
authors.forename: Tomasz
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Rzepiński
mesh_terms: D000465:Algorithms; D015984:Causality; D003627:Data Interpretation, Statistical; D005069:Evaluation Studies as Topic; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine / Q000592:standards / Q000639:trends; D006801:Humans; D019359:Knowledge; D008432:Mathematical Computing; D011336:Probability; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic