Journal of evaluation in clinical practice
-
To assess the criterion validity of paper-and-pencil vignettes to assess guideline adherence by physiotherapists in the Netherlands. The evidence-based physiotherapy practice guideline for low back pain was used as an example. ⋯ Vignettes are of acceptable validity, and are an inexpensive and manageable instrument to measure guideline adherence among large groups of physiotherapists. Further validation studies could benefit from the use of standardized patients as a gold standard, a more diverse case mix to better reflect real physiotherapy practice, and the inclusion of longitudinal vignettes that cover the patients' course of treatment.
-
Evidence that is both accurate (internally valid) and relevant (externally valid) is needed to decide which treatment is best for a particular patient. Evidence rankings facilitate the marshalling of evidence on clinical decisions in the common context of an overwhelming number of studies, some with conflicting results. Evidence from randomized control trials is typically ranked above evidence from non-experimental studies since rankings are based primarily, if not exclusively, on considerations of internal validity. ⋯ External validity includes how closely the study population, the institution types in the study, the types of physicians in the study, the role of clinician decision-making (e.g. dose adjustment) in the study, and the role of patient preferences in the study resemble those in actual practice. The example of spironolactone use in heart failure illustrates the danger in using evidence that is internally but not externally valid. Ideally, a treatment should only be used when both internally and externally valid evidence indicates that it will be useful for the particular patient.
-
In the past 14 years, Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) has enjoyed unprecedented developments and gained widespread acceptance among health professionals. However, should we be content with producing, critically appraising and using the best evidence available for our understanding of health problems and decision making about them? Are our convictions about EBM's relevance, our conviction and intellectual satisfaction with its mastery and adoption enough? Should we continue pushing forward along this promising path, or should we further diversify the content and scope of EBM? Is EBM the only way to view medicine in the near future? This paper presents some options to choose from in terms of direction and content as well as questions to answer given the current EBM crossroads. More intensive and extensive EBM combined with 'other features'-based medicines may be the preferred strategy to follow in the future to determine the development, use and evaluation of EBM. Argument-based medicine or Reasoned Medicine is one of the options that can be integrated into the mainstream of medical reasoning and decision making.
-
This paper examines how the concept of the 'evidence-based' approach has transferred from clinical medicine to public health and has been applied to health promotion and policy making. In policy making evidence has always been interpreted broadly to cover all types of reasoned enquiry and after some debate the same is now true for health promotion. ⋯ Evidence 'enlightens' policy makers shaping how policy problems are framed rather than providing the answer to any particular problem. There are lessons from the way that evidence-based policy is being applied in public health that could usefully be taken back into medicine.