Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
It's hard to know what works
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
The tenet that clinical practice should be guided by
rigorous evidence has become so ingrained that clinicians who are slow on the uptake are seen as not aware of the evidence, bogged down by
tradition, or
worse
having selfish motives for ignoring evidence. Rarely is the evidence itself questioned. Yet, if evidence were a
straightforward concept, there would be no reason for the two disciplines that appear to be governed by it, law and medicine, to be
at loggerheads so often.
The evidence available does not necessarily reveal what you are
interested in for a particular situation. Thus many reviews in the
Cochrane Library, the gold standard of systematic
reviews, devote no attention to adverse effects in assessing the
effectiveness of health care interventions (Bastian H, Middleton P. Cochrane Colloquium, Amsterdam, 1997). Yet any intervention (be it
advice, screening for disease, drugs, or surgery) that is likely to be beneficial
Read all Rapid Responses