Simply put the best available evidence on a particular
topic/disease/treatment.
--
Preston H. Long
> From: "Dr. G. Mustafa Soomro" <[log in to unmask]>
> Reply-To: "Dr. G. Mustafa Soomro" <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 21:52:07 -0000
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: A "little proof" for the pragmatic value of EBM
>
> The truth in EBM in my view does not come from EBM, but it comes from its
> foundation on empiricism (research) and logic (argument). However truth of
> empiricism and logic does drive from themselves - these are the final ports
> of call for (objective) truth.
>
> 'Subjective' individual 'truth' needs to tested again by objective truth
> criteria (empiricism and logic) for it to be of use to others.
>
> Mustafa Soomro MBBS MRCPsych
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Sunday, 14 January, 2001 21:06
> Subject: A "little proof" for the pragmatic value of EBM
>
>
>> In a message dated 1/14/2001 9:39:58 AM Central Standard Time,
>> [log in to unmask] writes:
>>
>>>
>>> Actually, ... postmodernists in medicine....have criticised EBM as being
> a
>> metanarrative, a grand truth that rests upon itself as being its own
>> foundation and truth.
>>
>> They point out that, while EBM approaches can make one practice more
>> evidence-based, there is little proof that evidence-based practice benefits
>> patients in ways other than making their practice more evidence-based.
>>
>> To Whom It May Concern....
>> Dr Sackett ,in correspondence exchanged several years ago did
>> agree with this definition of evidence-based medicine...i.e.
>> cited evidence, fact, truth and accurate information, when applied
>> to the on-going decisions made during the diagnosis and
>> treatment of patients is a form of "evidence-based"
>> medical practice.
>>
>> In my situation as a radiologic diagnostician, I
>> read journals, abstract their truths, stated advances
>> and clinical advisories then install them in my
>> computer. As day-to-day cases are processed, my
>> printed notions and observations are augmented
>> with specific citations to the supporting literature concerning that
>> diagnosis or finding.
>>
>> For 80,000 patient transactions processed by manual
>> methods (that is dictation, transcription and page-
>> by-page look-up of data stored in books and journals),
>> my case error rate was four percent.
>>
>> After computing the reports, reading the available
>> histories carried in electric archives and then
>> using the machine's stored data as an "electronic
>> look-up" source, my error rate fell to two percent
>> in a subsequent 100,000 cases.
>>
>> This observation is tucked away in the following
>> article " Solo Practice Management: Value of
>> a Computerized Reporting System" in the American
>> Journal of Roentgenology v 162: 1439-1441, June,
>> 1994.
>>
>> In summary, while proof of value for EBM is hard to
>> come by, there is some if you look for it.
>>
>> Karl T. Dockray, MD, DABR, ABNM
|