The application of Critical Theory to the design, interpretation, and authority of controlled studies—examining how this gold standard of evidence is shaped by assumptions, context, and power. Critical Theory of Controlled Studies asks: What counts as a "good" control? How do the conditions of controlled studies differ from real-world contexts? Whose bodies are studied, whose excluded? How does the authority of RCTs (randomized controlled trials) marginalize other forms of evidence? It doesn't reject controlled studies but insists they are not the only source of knowledge, and that their results must be interpreted with attention to context, power, and the limits of the method.
"It's not RCT, so it's not evidence. Critical Theory of Controlled Studies asks: says who? RCTs work for some questions, not others. They require populations, settings, interventions that may not reflect real life. Treating them as the only evidence ignores whole domains of knowledge—patient experience, clinical wisdom, qualitative research. Controlled studies are powerful, but they're not the only power. Critical theory insists on asking: what gets left out when only RCTs count?"
by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal March 4, 2026
Get the Critical Theory of Controlled Studies mug.