Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health logoLink to Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
. 2005 Nov;59(11):1000–1006. doi: 10.1136/jech.2004.031633

A landmark for popperian epidemiology: refutation of the randomised Aldactone evaluation study

E Koch 1, A Otarola 1, A Kirschbaum 1
PMCID: PMC1732945  PMID: 16234430

Abstract

In 1999 a great multi-site clinical trial known as the randomised Aldactone evaluation study (RALES) showed that the use of spironolactone importantly reduced complications attributable to chronic heart failure without major negative side effects. Recently, RALES has been questioned by a large scale observational study in the Ontario population. In contrast with predictions, the complications and mortality increased dramatically because of hyperkalaemia, reaching dimensions that from a public health perspective are comparable to an epidemic. This review analyses both researches in the light of Karl Popper's science theory applying the modus tollens syllogism to the reality proposed by the main empirical enunciations that ensue from its epidemiological designs. RALES is deductively refuted because of the non-fulfillment of auxiliary assumptions that would act as reciprocal potential falsifiers in both studies, taking the logical form of a bi-conditional argument of the type: (a) P-then-Q and (b) Q-if-XP, XP being a set of potential falsifiers of Q as part of the explicit falsity content of P. From this popperian model, implications for clinical research are discussed.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (99.4 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Allmark Peter. Popper and nursing theory. Nurs Philos. 2003 Apr;4(1):4–16. doi: 10.1046/j.1466-769x.2003.00114.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Antiseri D. Filosofi, fisici e medici a difesa dell'unità del metodo scientifico. Clin Ter. 1998 Nov-Dec;149(6):429–433. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Ayres J. R. O problema do conhecimento verdadeiro na epidemiologia. Rev Saude Publica. 1992 Jun;26(3):206–214. doi: 10.1590/s0034-89101992000300013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Banegas J. R., Rodríguez Artalejo F., del Rey Calero J. Popper y el problema de la inducción en epidemiología. Rev Esp Salud Publica. 2000 Jul-Aug;74(4):327–339. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Benson K., Hartz A. J. A comparison of observational studies and randomized, controlled trials. N Engl J Med. 2000 Jun 22;342(25):1878–1886. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200006223422506. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Boissel J. P. Note sur l'épistémologie de la pharmacologie clinique: confrontation à l'approche de Karl Popper. Therapie. 1999 Jan-Feb;54(1):67–73. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bozkurt Biykem, Agoston Ildiko, Knowlton A. A. Complications of inappropriate use of spironolactone in heart failure: when an old medicine spirals out of new guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003 Jan 15;41(2):211–214. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(02)02694-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Buck C. Popper's philosophy for epidemiologists. Int J Epidemiol. 1975 Sep;4(3):159–168. doi: 10.1093/ije/4.3.159. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Charlton Bruce G. Fundamental deficiencies in the megatrial methodology. Curr Control Trials Cardiovasc Med. 2001;2(1):2–7. doi: 10.1186/cvm-2-1-002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Cohen Aaron Michael, Stavri P. Zoë, Hersh William R. A categorization and analysis of the criticisms of Evidence-Based Medicine. Int J Med Inform. 2004 Feb;73(1):35–43. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2003.11.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Cole S. R. Atheoretical science: a response to the poverty of popperian epidemiology. Int J Epidemiol. 1996 Aug;25(4):899–900. doi: 10.1093/ije/25.4.899. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Cook D. J., Mulrow C. D., Haynes R. B. Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Ann Intern Med. 1997 Mar 1;126(5):376–380. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-126-5-199703010-00006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Ghali W. A., Cornuz J. Early uptake of research findings after fast-track publication. Lancet. 2000 Feb 12;355(9203):579–580. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)73234-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Goldfarb David S. Hyperkalemia after the publication of RALES. N Engl J Med. 2004 Dec 2;351(23):2448–2450. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200412023512320. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Goodman S. N. Toward evidence-based medical statistics. 1: The P value fallacy. Ann Intern Med. 1999 Jun 15;130(12):995–1004. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-130-12-199906150-00008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Greenland S. Induction versus Popper: substance versus semantics. Int J Epidemiol. 1998 Aug;27(4):543–548. doi: 10.1093/ije/27.4.543. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Greenland S. Probability logic and probabilistic induction. Epidemiology. 1998 May;9(3):322–332. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Guyatt G. H., Sackett D. L., Cook D. J. Users' guides to the medical literature. II. How to use an article about therapy or prevention. A. Are the results of the study valid? Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA. 1993 Dec 1;270(21):2598–2601. doi: 10.1001/jama.270.21.2598. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Havlícek J. Popperův kritický racionalismus a biomedicínské vedy. Cas Lek Cesk. 1993 Nov 8;132(21):641–644. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Holmberg L., Baum M., Adami H. O. On the scientific inference from clinical trials. J Eval Clin Pract. 1999 May;5(2):157–162. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2753.1999.00206.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Hyams Kenneth C. The investigation of chronic fatigue syndrome: a case-study of the limitations of inductive inferences and non-falsifiable hypotheses in medical research. Med Hypotheses. 2003 May;60(5):760–766. doi: 10.1016/s0306-9877(03)00062-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Högel J., Gaus W. The procedure of new drug application and the philosophy of critical rationalism or the limits of quality assurance with good clinical practice. Control Clin Trials. 1999 Dec;20(6):511–518. doi: 10.1016/s0197-2456(99)00030-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Jacobsen M. Against Popperized epidemiology. Int J Epidemiol. 1976 Mar;5(1):9–11. doi: 10.1093/ije/5.1.9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Juurlink David N., Mamdani Muhammad M., Lee Douglas S., Kopp Alexander, Austin Peter C., Laupacis Andreas, Redelmeier Donald A. Rates of hyperkalemia after publication of the Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study. N Engl J Med. 2004 Aug 5;351(6):543–551. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa040135. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Karhausen L. R. The poverty of Popperian epidemiology. Int J Epidemiol. 1995 Oct;24(5):869–874. doi: 10.1093/ije/24.5.869. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Kulbertus H. L'étude clinique du mois. L'étude RALES (randomized aldactone evaluation study). Rev Med Liege. 1999 Sep;54(9):770–772. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Maclure M. Demonstration of deductive meta-analysis: ethanol intake and risk of myocardial infarction. Epidemiol Rev. 1993;15(2):328–351. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.epirev.a036124. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Maclure M. Inventing the AIDS virus hypothesis: an illustration of scientific vs unscientific induction. Epidemiology. 1998 Jul;9(4):467–473. doi: 10.1097/00001648-199807000-00026. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Maclure M. Karl Popper and his unending quest: an epidemiologic interpretation. Epidemiology. 1995 May;6(3):331–334. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Maclure M. Multivariate refutation of aetiological hypotheses in non-experimental epidemiology. Int J Epidemiol. 1990 Dec;19(4):782–787. doi: 10.1093/ije/19.4.782. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Maclure M. On the logic and practice of epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol. 1987 Sep;126(3):554–556. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a114688. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Maclure M. Popperian refutation in epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol. 1985 Mar;121(3):343–350. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a114005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Maclure M. Taxonomic axes of epidemiologic study designs: a refutationist perspective. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991;44(10):1045–1053. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(91)90006-u. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Majumdar Sumit R., McAlister Finlay A., Soumerai Stephen B. Synergy between publication and promotion: comparing adoption of new evidence in Canada and the United States. Am J Med. 2003 Oct 15;115(6):467–472. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9343(03)00422-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Malavasi Antonello, Realdi Giuseppe. La struttura logica della cartella clinica orientata per problemi. Un approccio combinato Popperiano-Bayesiano. Ann Ital Med Int. 2002 Jan-Mar;17(1):21–30. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Masoudi Frederick A., Havranek Edward P., Wolfe Pam, Gross Cary P., Rathore Saif S., Steiner John F., Ordin Diana L., Krumholz Harlan M. Most hospitalized older persons do not meet the enrollment criteria for clinical trials in heart failure. Am Heart J. 2003 Aug;146(2):250–257. doi: 10.1016/S0002-8703(03)00189-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. McMurray John J. V., O'Meara Eileen. Treatment of heart failure with spironolactone--trial and tribulations. N Engl J Med. 2004 Aug 5;351(6):526–528. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp048144. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Naylor C. D. Grey zones of clinical practice: some limits to evidence-based medicine. Lancet. 1995 Apr 1;345(8953):840–842. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(95)92969-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Pearce N., Crawford-Brown D. Critical discussion in epidemiology: problems with the Popperian approach. J Clin Epidemiol. 1989;42(3):177–184. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(89)90053-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Pearce N. The ecological fallacy strikes back. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2000 May;54(5):326–327. doi: 10.1136/jech.54.5.326. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Pitt B., Zannad F., Remme W. J., Cody R., Castaigne A., Perez A., Palensky J., Wittes J. The effect of spironolactone on morbidity and mortality in patients with severe heart failure. Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1999 Sep 2;341(10):709–717. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199909023411001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Poole C. Commentary: positivized epidemiology and the model of sufficient and component causes. Int J Epidemiol. 2001 Aug;30(4):707–709. doi: 10.1093/ije/30.4.707. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Renton A. Epidemiology and causation: a realist view. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1994 Feb;48(1):79–85. doi: 10.1136/jech.48.1.79. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Rothwell Peter M. External validity of randomised controlled trials: "to whom do the results of this trial apply?". Lancet. 2005 Jan 1;365(9453):82–93. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17670-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Sehon Scott R., Stanley Donald E. A philosophical analysis of the evidence-based medicine debate. BMC Health Serv Res. 2003 Jul 21;3(1):14–14. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-3-14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Senn S. J. Falsificationism and clinical trials. Stat Med. 1991 Nov;10(11):1679–1692. doi: 10.1002/sim.4780101106. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Shahar E. A Popperian perspective of the term 'evidence-based medicine'. J Eval Clin Pract. 1997 Apr;3(2):109–116. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2753.1997.00092.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Susser M. What is a cause and how do we know one? A grammar for pragmatic epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol. 1991 Apr 1;133(7):635–648. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115939. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Tang W. H. Wilson, Francis Gary S. Spironolactone in chronic heart failure:all's well that ends well. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003 Jan 15;41(2):215–216. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(02)02695-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Tonelli M. R. In defense of expert opinion. Acad Med. 1999 Nov;74(11):1187–1192. doi: 10.1097/00001888-199911000-00010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Weed D. L. An epidemiological application of Popper's method. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1985 Dec;39(4):277–285. doi: 10.1136/jech.39.4.277. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Weed D. L. On the logic of causal inference. Am J Epidemiol. 1986 Jun;123(6):965–979. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a114349. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Weed D. L. Theory and practice in epidemiology. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2001 Dec;954:52–62. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2001.tb02746.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. de Dombal F. T. Epidemiology of Crohn's disease of the colon. Ann Gastroenterol Hepatol (Paris) 1985 Jul-Sep;21(4):191–200. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES