What good is randomization in Randomized Controlled Trials?
EBM advocates require studies to be properly randomized in order to be judged high quality. But on the face of it, randomization is an odd virtue, since it introduces a chance element and so also an element of avoidable ignorance into the scientific process. Some theorists (e.g.
Bayesians) reject the requirement for randomization, while others accept it—but for different reasons.

We look at the arguments surrounding its justification.
Core reading:
Elwood, M. (2007) Critical Appraisal of Epidemiological Studies and Clinical Trials OUP. Chapter 6, parts 1-2,
Papineau, D. (1994) The virtues of randomization. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 45:437–50.
Worrall, J. (2007) Why there’s no cause to randomize. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 58:451–88.
Date: 10 November 2015, 16:30 (Tuesday, 5th week, Michaelmas 2015)
Venue: All Souls College, High Street OX1 4AL
Venue Details: Hovenden Room
Speakers: Professor Alexander Bird (Faculty of Philosophy, University of Oxford), Dr Jeremy Howick (Nuffield Dept. of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford.)
Organising department: Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences
Organiser contact email address: jeremy.howick@phc.ox.ac.uk
Part of: Topics in the philosophy of medicine
Topics:
Booking required?: Not required
Audience: Members of the University only
Editor: Dan Richards-Doran