Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Inferences about the effects of treatments, including surgical treatments, rely on making comparisons. These comparisons may be with patient’s symptoms before a treatment has been applied. For example, the return of hearing after puncturing the ear drum (tympanotomy) in certain kinds of longstanding deafness can be so dramatic that the change can be confidently ascribed to the treatment.1,2 More usually, treatments have more modest effects, and alternative treatments may differ from each other only slightly, if at all. In these circumstances, disagreements are common about the mechanisms, the magnitude of any effects and the value of a particular treatment. Examples include disputes about different ways of treating wounds,3,4 the timing and methods of limb amputations,5–10 and about lithotripsy as an alternative to lithotomy.11–13

More information Original publication

DOI

10.1177/0141076818769833

Type

Journal article

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Publication Date

2018-05-10T00:00:00+00:00

Volume

111

Pages

177 - 182

Total pages

5