Systematische Studienübersichten in der Kardiologie: Ansätze einer evidenzbasierten Medizin und die Cochrane-Collaboration (Systematic reviews in cardiology. Concepts of evidence-based medicine and the Cochrane Collaboration)

1997 ◽  
Vol 86 (5) ◽  
pp. 313-319 ◽  
Author(s):  
H.-W. Hense ◽  
G. Antes
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Cochrane Collaboration ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
The Cochrane Collaboration ◽  
Based Medicine

scholarly journals Psychiatry in the future

2004 ◽  
Vol 28 (8) ◽  
pp. 277-278
Author(s):  
Frank Holloway
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Cochrane Collaboration ◽  
Routine Clinical Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Cochrane Collaboration ◽  
Based Medicine

In an era of evidence-based medicine, policy-makers and researchers are preoccupied by the task of ensuring that advances in research are implemented in routine clinical practice. This preoccupation has spawned a small but growing research industry of its own, with the development of resources such as the Cochrane Collaboration database and journals such as Evidence-Based Mental Health. In this paper, I adopt a philosophically quite unfashionable methodology – introspection – to address the question: how has research affected my practice?

Evidence-Based Medicine and Anaesthesia: Uneasy Bedfellows?

1997 ◽  
Vol 25 (6) ◽  
pp. 679-685 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. F. Horan
Keyword(s):  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Medical Literature ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Cochrane Collaboration ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Intermediate Outcomes ◽  
Multicentre Trials ◽  
The Cochrane Collaboration ◽  
Based Medicine

The term “evidence-based medicine” first appeared in the medical literature in 1992 and is in widespread use today. It is timely to examine the concept's relevance to anaesthetic practice as well as the validity of the premises on which it rests. An important difference between anaesthesia and the specialties which treat disease is that in anaesthesia there is very little research done with real outcomes as its end-point. Surrogate or intermediate outcomes predominate as the end-points of anaesthetic research, which is a weakness when the results serve as the evidence on which to base clinical decisions. Furthermore, in interventions which require personal skill, dexterity or decision-making, caution must be exercised in assuming that equally good outcomes are achievable by all. Key members of the Cochrane Collaboration, among the most prominent advocates of evidence-based medicine, promote the belief that much valid scientific evidence is to be found in sources outside the peer-reviewed published literature. This assertion must be treated with caution. Furthermore, some techniques central to the search for the evidence on which to base practice, including meta-analysis and multicentre trials, are prone to errors through incorrect application. Evidence-based medicine appears to have less to offer anaesthesia than it does to the “treating” specialties.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document