Things That Need To Be In The Introduction

This list will expand.

- The aim of medical research. There is an ambiguity through much of the clinical literature as to whether (i) we are trying to establish whether a drug works. In which case, I think, there is an argument for a conservative approach (i.e. the high internal validity of randomised trials). Or (ii) we are trying to inform therapeutic decisions.

• I am focussing on the second aim; as it is what EBM is focussed on. But recognising the difference between the two, and the different methods each may call for, is important.

- Discuss originality. Most arguments within the thesis can be found somewhere in the clinical literature. However, because theory and philosophy is typically eschewed in favour of empirical findings, no systematic argument is provided by way of justification of EBM. (at least no argument that stands to scrutiny)

- Stuff from this page: Therapeutic Decisions Model

- Why EBM is (and should be) of interest to philosophers. {[blue Good, but don’t worry too much about this because: (1) We’ll get you examiners who are OK with this; and (2) If you try to do this properly it will take lots of words. Jason ]} —>Little epistemological justification done by medics —>Central questions of philosophy of science; cf philosophy of physics

- many more, just can’t think of them now.