The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The missed lessons of Sir Austin Bradford Hill
Open accessAbstract
Austin Bradford Hill's landmark 1965 paper contains several important lessons for the current conduct of epidemiology. Unfortunately, it is almost exclusively cited as the source of the "Bradford-Hill criteria" for inferring causation when association is observed, despite Hill's explicit statement that cause-effect decisions cannot be based on a set of rules. Overlooked are Hill's important lessons about how to make decisions based on epidemiologic evidence. He advised epidemiologists to avoid over-emphasizing statistical significance testing, given the observation that systematic error is often greater than random error. His compelling and intuitive examples point out the need to consider costs and benefits when making decisions about health-promoting interventions. These lessons, which offer ways to dramatically increase the contribution of health science to decision making, are as needed today as they were when Hill presented them.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Coase, R. H. (1960) · The Journal of Law and Economics · doi:10.1086/466560 · Cited by 18,255
Causal Diagrams for Epidemiologic Research
Greenland, S., Pearl, J., & Robins, J. M. (1999) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/00001648-199901000-00008 · Cited by 3,728
Quantifying and Reporting Uncertainty from Systematic Errors
Phillips, C. V. (2003) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/01.ede.0000072106.65262.ae · Cited by 168
Self-citationGreenland, S. (2003) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1198/01621450338861905 · Cited by 141
Cited by
Hormones and endocrine-disrupting chemicals: low-dose effects and nonmonotonic dose responses
Vandenberg, L. N., Colborn, T., Hayes, T. B., Heindel, J. J., Jacobs, D. R., Lee, D.-H., Shioda, T., Soto, A. M., vom Saal, F. S., Welshons, W. V., et al. (2012) · Endocrine Reviews · doi:10.1210/er.2011-1050 · Cited by 3,209
The Contribution of Maternal Stress to Preterm Birth: Issues and Considerations
Wadhwa, P. D., Entringer, S., Buss, C., & Lu, M. C. (2011) · Clinics in Perinatology · doi:10.1016/j.clp.2011.06.007 · Cited by 486
Causal Inference in Public Health
Glass, T. A., Goodman, S. N., Hernán, M. A., & Samet, J. M. (2013) · Annual Review of Public Health · doi:10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031811-124606 · Cited by 398
The Bradford Hill considerations on causality: a counterfactual perspective
Höfler, M. (2005) · Emerging Themes in Epidemiology · doi:10.1186/1742-7622-2-11 · Cited by 340
Observational research--opportunities and limitations
Boyko, E. J. (2013) · Journal of Diabetes and its Complications · doi:10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2013.07.007 · Cited by 313
Metadata
- Authors
- Phillips, C. V., & Goodman, K. J.
- Venue
- Epidemiologic Perspectives & Innovations
- Published
- 2004-10-04
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 3-3
- ISSN
- 1742-5573 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2131639327
- Cited by
- 181
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 6.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The missed lessons of Sir Austin Bradford Hill. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1742-5573-1-3
- The paper
- Phillips, C. V., & Goodman, K. J. (2004). The missed lessons of Sir Austin Bradford Hill. Epidemiologic Perspectives & Innovations. https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-5573-1-3
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.