scholarly journals Evolution of Evidence-Based Medicine in Stroke

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Graeme J. Hankey

The introduction and evolution of evidence-based stroke medicine has realized major advances in our knowledge about stroke, methods of medical research, and patient outcomes that continue to complement traditional individual patient care. It is humbling to recall the state of knowledge and scientific endeavour of our forebears who were unaware of what we know now and yet pursued the highest standards for evaluating and delivering effective stroke care. The science of stroke medicine has evolved from pathophysiological theory to empirical testing. Progress has been steady, despite inevitable disappointments and cul-de-sacs, and has occasionally been punctuated by sensational breakthroughs, such as the advent of reperfusion therapies guided by imaging.

2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-43
Author(s):  
Brian Walsh

Background: Popper has argued that knowledge is insecure, and moved the emphasis to conjecture and refutation. Science, Popper avers, does not build up universal laws from singular statements (representing events), since the principle of induction is non-existent. He would see many instances of confirmation of EBM methods, but EBM theory is too vague for refutation. Methods: I consider whether EBM has a theory, or whether it is heuristic, a method. I examine EBM's use of inductivism and falsificationism. I look at Popper's approach to knowledge (conjecture and refutation) and I relate this to EBM. Results: Popper writes about how to evaluate whether theories are scientific. But this scarcely applies to EBM. This is because EBM has left theory to the academics while it proceeds to develop and promulgate a method of practising medicine. Contra Popper, EBM does not put forward a theory for scholarly debate or empirical testing. By contrast, it promulgates a strict, detailed method whose merits are self-evident. (Who will argue against the evidence?) Conclusions: While EBM makes extensive use of falsification in evaluating tests and treatments, as a whole it fails to reach scientific status, as judged by Popper. It scarcely puts forward a risky theory to be challenged, and such theory as can be spider-webbed together is too diffuse to be precisely defined then falsified. Even so, I have provided a guide towards evaluating such EBM theory as there is.


2009 ◽  
Vol 1;12 (1;1) ◽  
pp. 73-108 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) stresses the examination of evidence from clinical research and describes it as a shift in medical paradigms, in contrast to intuition, unsystematic clinical experience, and pathophysiologic rationale. While the importance of randomized trials has been created by the concept of the hierarchy of evidence in guiding therapy, much of the medical research is observational. There is competition, contrast, and a feeling of inferiority and uselessness for observational studies, created by a lack of understanding of medical research. However, observational studies and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) can be viewed as the steps of observation and experimentation that form the basis of the scientific methodology. Further, rational healthcare practices require knowledge about the etiology and pathogenesis, diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of disorders. The reporting of observational research is often not detailed and clear enough with insufficient quality and poor reporting, which hampers the assessment of strengths and weaknesses of the study and the generalizability of the mixed results. Thus, design, implementation, and reporting of observational studies is crucial. The biased interpretation of results from observational studies, either in favor of or opposed to a treatment, and lack of proper understanding of observational studies, leads to a poor appraisal of the quality. Similar to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement for the reporting of randomized trials, the Strengthening of the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement was developed with recommendations to improve the quality of reporting observational studies. The STROBE statement consists of a checklist of 22 items, which relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles. Multiple types of observational studies are conducted; however, 3 types have been highlighted in the STROBE document and also in the present review, which include cohort studies, case-controlled studies, and cross-sectional studies. This comprehensive review provides an introduction and rationale, types, design, and reporting of observational studies; outcomes assessment and data presentation and analysis; statistical analysis, results, and a discussion of observational studies. Key words: Observational studies, cohort studies, case control studies, cross-sectional studies, allocation bias, sample size, Strengthening of the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE)


2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Krishnavelli Marla Naidoo

Managed care is defined by Chetty (1999: 1) as "the practice of evidence based medicine with an approach to managing both the quality and cost of medical care". Managed care was introduced into South Africa in the last decade due to increasing cost of healthcare. All forms of managed care represent attempts to control costs by modifying the behaviour of general practitioners.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document