THE USE AND MISUSE OF BRADFORD HILL IN U.S. TORT LAW

This article originated from a conference at the Royal Society of Medicine in 2016 that celebrated the 51st Anniversary of Sir Austin Bradford Hill’s Presidential Address to the Royal Society: The Environment and Disease: Association or Causation? Courts widely recognize that Hill’s published addres...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJurimetrics (Chicago, Ill.) Vol. 58; no. 2; pp. 127 - 162
Main Authors Neutra, Raymond Richard, Cranor, Carl F., Gee, David
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Chicago American Bar Association 01.01.2018
Subjects
Analysis
Burden of proof
Causality
Causation (Tort law)
Costs
Environmental aspects
Environmental health
Evidence
Federal court decisions
Hill, Austin Bradford
History
Hydrocarbons
Influence
Laws, regulations and rules
Leukemia
Probability
Probability theory
Quantitative research
Society
Torts
United States > US
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:This article originated from a conference at the Royal Society of Medicine in 2016 that celebrated the 51st Anniversary of Sir Austin Bradford Hill’s Presidential Address to the Royal Society: The Environment and Disease: Association or Causation? Courts widely recognize that Hill’s published address articulates an important methodology for assisting causal inferences from epidemiological studies. A Westlaw search of federal district and appellate court decisions citing “Hill’s aspects,” “Hill’s considerations,” or “Hill’s criteria” revealed numerous illustrative cases in which Hill’s address has been invoked by judges ruling on the use of epidemiology in tort cases. Through analysis of numerous cases, this article illustrates that although some judges and advocates seem to understand Hill’s address, many fail to correctly understand Hill’s methodology and recommendations. This article argues that an understanding of the probabilistic foundations of epidemiology reveals that Hill is well justified in his recommended examinations of epidemiological (and other) evidence and his recommendations for interpreting the results of those examinations to warrant causal inference.
ISSN:0897-1277
2154-4344