For me, there's a key qualification re EBM being about identifying the BEST treatment for individuals or populations. This may be splitting hairs, but it may be important to distinguish that its actually about identifying options and then advising about the PROBABILITY of different options helping and / or harming (setting aside issues for cost effectiveness and affordability). We often can't be sure whether and individual would be fine without treatement, is one of those who will benefit from treatmetn or suffer the outcome we are trying to prevent despite treatment, or be even be harmed.
So its about probabilities, not absolutes. Whereas proof and SBM seems to be to be more about absolutes?
Best wishes
Neal
Neal Maskrey
National Prescribing Centre
Liverpool UK
----- Original Message -----
From: Douglas Badenoch [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 08:31 AM
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: EBM vs SBM
I think both spellings may be allowable in this instance.
I tend to agree, Michael - this idea that EBM = RCTs seems to have
spread like a virus. It's interesting how people have latched onto the
Levels of Evidence to demonstrate EBM's positivist fascism.
However, I think that the root of the issue is, as is often the case,
with the Research Question.
EBMers, by and large, are considering the question of "What is the best
thing to do for my patient or population?", whereas SBMers seem, on the
face of it, to be dealing with the question "What is knowledge?"
Very different concerns!
cheers
Douglas
Michael Power wrote:
>
> Zbys, Thanks for correcting my spelling!
>
>
>
> Spelling isn’t my strongest point, and it shows when I use words not
> in Word’s dictionary
>
>
>
> *From:* [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> *Sent:* 21 September 2010 06:34
> *To:* Michael Power
> *Subject:* Fwd: EBM vs SBM
>
>
>
> --- the forwarded message follows ---
>
>
>
> Michael I agree with the final sentiment/qualifying statement but
> would have used the word BOLLOX... or Bullocks ? load of old tosh?
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Zbys
>
> Bahrain Branch UK CC
>
> The Cochrane Collaboration
>
>
>
|