What kind of evidence is it that Evidence-Based Medicine advocates want health care providers and consumers to pay attention to?
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 6 March 2002
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Health Services Research
- Vol. 2 (1) , 3
- https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-2-3
Abstract
In 1992, Evidence-Based Medicine advocates proclaimed a "new paradigm", in which evidence from health care research is the best basis for decisions for individual patients and health systems. Hailed in New York Times Magazine in 2001 as one of the most influential ideas of the year, this approach was initially and provocatively pitted against the traditional teaching of medicine, in which the key elements of knowing for clinical purposes are understanding of basic pathophysiologic mechanisms of disease coupled with clinical experience. This paper reviews the origins, aspirations, philosophical limitations, and practical challenges of evidence-based medicine. EBM has long since evolved beyond its initial (mis)conception, that EBM might replace traditional medicine. EBM is now attempting to augment rather than replace individual clinical experience and understanding of basic disease mechanisms. EBM must continue to evolve, however, to address a number of issues including scientific underpinnings, moral stance and consequences, and practical matters of dissemination and application. For example, accelerating the transfer of research findings into clinical practice is often based on incomplete evidence from selected groups of people, who experience a marginal benefit from an expensive technology, raising issues of the generalizability of the findings, and increasing problems with how many and who can afford the new innovations in care. Advocates of evidence-based medicine want clinicians and consumers to pay attention to the best findings from health care research that are both valid and ready for clinical application. Much remains to be done to reach this goal.This publication has 30 references indexed in Scilit:
- Randomized Trials or Observational Tribulations?New England Journal of Medicine, 2000
- Randomized, Controlled Trials, Observational Studies, and the Hierarchy of Research DesignsNew England Journal of Medicine, 2000
- A Comparison of Observational Studies and Randomized, Controlled TrialsNew England Journal of Medicine, 2000
- Carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosisPublished by Wiley ,1999
- The Cochrane Collaboration-Advances and Challenges in Improving Evidence-based Decision MakingMedical Decision Making, 1998
- US National Survey of Physician Practices for the Secondary and Tertiary Prevention of Ischemic StrokeStroke, 1996
- Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trialsJAMA, 1995
- The Effect of Intensive Treatment of Diabetes on the Development and Progression of Long-Term Complications in Insulin-Dependent Diabetes MellitusNew England Journal of Medicine, 1993
- Failure of Extracranial–Intracranial Arterial Bypass to Reduce the Risk of Ischemic StrokeNew England Journal of Medicine, 1985
- Streptomycin Treatment of Pulmonary Tuberculosis: A Medical Research Council InvestigationBMJ, 1948