Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Commentary and Review
  • Published:

Work on your theories!

Nature Medicine volume 2, pages 844–846 (1996)Cite this article

Constructive critical thinking about the theories behind science could revolutionize clinical research.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Popper, K.R., Science: aims, responsibilities. in The Myth of the Framework (ed. Notturno, M.A.) 86, (Routledge, London, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Early Breast Cancer Trialist's Collaborative Group. Systemic treatment of early breast cancer by hormonal, cytotoxic, or immune therapy. Lancet 339, 1–15, 71–85 (1992).

  3. Fisher, B. Laboratory and clinical research in breast cancer — a personal adventure (David E. Kamofsky Memorial Lecture). Cancer Res. 40, 3863–3874 (1980).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Baum, M. & Colletta, A. Breast cancer: A revolutionary concept (review). Breast Cancer 2, 9–18 (1995).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Oliver, R.T.D. Does surgery disseminate or accelerate cancer? Lancet 346, 1506–1507 (1995).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Veronesi, U. et al. Local recurrences and distant metastases after conservative breast cancer treatments: Partly independent events. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 87, 19–27 (1995).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Gage, I. et al. Long-term outcome following breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol Biol. Phys. 33, 245–251 (1995).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Popper, K.R. Epistemology without a knowing subject. Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach, (ed. Popper, K.R.) 106–112 (Clarendon, Oxford, 1979).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Popper, K.R., Science: Problems, aims, responsibilities. in The Myth of the Framework (ed. Notturno, M.A.) 102–103, (Routledge, London, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Popper, K.R. The aim of science. in Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach, (ed. Popper, K.R.) 202–203 (Clarendon, Oxford, 1979).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Popper, K.R. Two faces of common sense: An argument for commonsense realism and against the commonsense theory of knowledge. in Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach, (ed. Popper, K.R.) 32–33 (Clarendon, Oxford, 1979).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, University Hospital, S-751 85, Uppsala, Sweden

    Lars Holmberg

  2. Institute of Surgical Studies, University College London Medical School, London, W1P 7LD, UK

    Michael Baum

Authors
  1. Lars Holmberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Baum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Holmberg, L., Baum, M. Work on your theories!. Nat Med 2, 844–846 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1038/nm0896-844

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nm0896-844

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing