Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

The evidence thing.

Ramon Berguer1

  • 1Division of Vascular Surgery, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48322, USA. rberguer@med.wayne.edu

Annals of Vascular Surgery
|September 10, 2004
PubMed
Summary

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) dominates clinical research but has limitations. While EBM rigorously analyzes therapy effectiveness, it may hinder discovery of new treatments, necessitating a balance with observational and inductive methods.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

The Caged Professional.

Annals of vascular surgery·2024
Same author

Treatment of venous pulsatile tinnitus in younger women.

Annals of vascular surgery·2015
Same author

Postural ergonomics during robotic and laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery: a pilot project.

Journal of robotic surgery·2014
Same author

Experimental and clinical evidence supporting septectomy in the primary treatment of acute type B thoracic aortic dissection.

Annals of vascular surgery·2014
Same author

The vote that vanished.

Annals of vascular surgery·2014
Same author

Edouard Kieffer 1942-2014.

Annals of vascular surgery·2014

Area of Science:

  • Clinical research methodology
  • Philosophy of medicine

Background:

  • Evidence-based medicine (EBM) has become the dominant paradigm in clinical practice.
  • This dominance may overshadow historically validated medical approaches.
  • The structure of EBM aligns with regulatory, academic, and publishing interests.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To critically evaluate the philosophical underpinnings of EBM.
  • To review the strengths and weaknesses of EBM's primary tools: randomized trials and meta-analysis.
  • To discuss the limitations of EBM in discovering novel treatments and diseases.

Main Methods:

  • Philosophical analysis of EBM principles.
  • Review of randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis methodologies.
  • Examination of EBM's application in comparing medical versus surgical therapies.

Main Results:

  • EBM's deductive-numerical approach excels at detecting small differences in established treatments.
  • EBM is less suited for discovering new diseases or treatments, which often arise from observation and induction.
  • Specific challenges exist when applying EBM to compare medical and surgical interventions.

Conclusions:

  • EBM is a valuable tool for analyzing the effectiveness of certain therapies but is not a universal solution for clinical research.
  • Stimulating and publishing observational and inductive clinical intelligence is crucial for therapeutic innovation.
  • Advancements in non-randomized study methodologies are needed, paralleling improvements in randomized study designs.

Related Experiment Videos