In this, "internal" means that the study itself and the analysis have been designed and performed in correct manners, and "external" means that the results can be extrapolated to the population the therapist is dealing with (you know that, but junior students may read this as well).

I recently had the opportunity to take a course from George Davies. What struck me was that he spoke in facts and rarely did he speak in opinions. 90-95% of what he said was supported with studies. That personal level of accountability is much more difficult to achieve than giving opinions. Being able to speak mostly in fact with our patients is what I believe is the essence of the evidence based movement. I have been preparing for OCS and I have found this to be the case. Our profession is striving to push us to a higher level than empirical opinions now. Don't misunderstand me, empirical thought lays the groundwork and science either confirms or refutes. It's not an all or nothing sort of thing. But, there is quite a bit more research out there than most realize.

From a philosophical standpoint, I'm wondering if the PT's out there agree with what I'm saying and whether or not PT's in general embrace evidence-based practice (EBP). There was an article in the latest PT Magazine, (a publication by the APTA) that said many PT's are frustrated with the direction that the profession is taking us (i.e. autonomous, doctorate level, direct access and, most importantly, EBP). I know we had a rather lengthy discussion on the DPT about a year or so ago and I don't want to open that back up in detail, I just want to hear the thoughts of those that participate on this list.

Thanks,

Jason