title: Negative mechanistic reasoning in medical intervention assessment.
abstract: Traditionally, mechanistic reasoning has been assigned a negligible role in standard EBM (evidence-based medicine) literature, although some recent authors have argued for an upgrade. Even so, the mechanistic reasoning that has received attention has almost exclusively been positive--both in an epistemic sense of claiming that there is a mechanistic chain and in a health-related sense of there being claimed benefits for the patient. Negative mechanistic reasoning has been neglected, both in the epistemic and in the health-related sense. I distinguish three main types of negative mechanistic reasoning and subsume them under a new definition of mechanistic reasoning in the context of assessing medical interventions. This definition is wider than a previous suggestion in the literature. Each negative type corresponds to a range of evidential strengths, and it is argued that there are differences with respect to typical evidential strengths. The variety of negative mechanistic reasoning should be acknowledged in EBM, and it presents a serious challenge to proponents of so-called medical hierarchies of evidence.
authors.affiliation: Division of Philosophy, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Brinellvägen 32, 100 44, Stockholm, Sweden. jerkert@kth.se.
authors.forename: Jesper
authors.identifier: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9373-3067
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Jerkert
mesh_terms: D003657:Decision Making; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D006801:Humans; D013850:Thinking
keywords: Evidence-based medicine; Hierarchy of evidence; Mechanistic reasoning