Article Text
Abstract
“Evidence based medicine” (EBM) is often seen as a scientific tool for quality improvement, even though its application requires the combination of scientific facts with value judgments and the costing of different treatments. How this is done depends on whether we approach the problem from the perspective of individual patients, doctors, or public health administrators. Evidence based medicine exerts a fundamental influence on certain key aspects of medical professionalism. Since, when clinical practice guidelines are created, costs affect the content of EBM, EBM inevitably becomes a form of rationing and adopts a public health point of view. This challenges traditional professionalism in much the same way as managed care has done in the US. Here we chart some of these major philosophical issues and show why simple solutions cannot be found. The profession needs to pay more attention to different uses of EBM in order to preserve the good aspects of professionalism.
- evidence based medicine
- guidelines
- rationing
- medical professionalism
- medical ethics
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Ethics, EBM, and hospital management
- Knowledge and use of evidence-based medicine in daily practice by health professionals: a cross-sectional survey
- Radiologists’ perspectives about evidence-based medicine and their clinical practice: a semistructured interview study
- The transformation of (bio)ethics expertise in a world of ethical pluralism
- Healthcare rationing—are additional criteria needed for assessing evidence based clinical practice guidelines?
- Potential for epistemic injustice in evidence-based healthcare policy and guidance
- The right care, every time: improving adherence to evidence-based guidelines
- Is surgical mystique a myth and double standard the reality?
- Evidence-based medicine and complementary medicine
- Face-to-face versus online clinically integrated EBM teaching in an undergraduate medical school: a pilot study