he mission of IJATT is to publish peer-reviewed reports pertaining to clinical applications of research findings; procedures found to be effective in the recognition, rehabilitation, and prevention of sport-related injuries; and professional practice issues. The major tenet of our mission is to help clinicians find balance between the best available research evidence and their own clinical expertise when making clinical decisions. Over the past 3 years, we have developed a series of editorials to highlight the delicate balance between control and generalizability in clinical research, 1 the importance of the integration of external evidence (best available research) and internal evidence (clinical expertise) when making clinical decisions, 2 and the necessity of outcomes in legitimizing our professional knowledge and ability.3 However, we have not yet provided framework for patient values and preferences, the often forgotten component of evidence-based practice and practice-based evidence.In the midst of adding EBP continuing education requirements for athletic trainers, there emerged a trend to consider clinicians as "in the wrong" by using interventions that were not "evidence-based"… and by 'evidence', it is implied that this is actually 'research-evidence'. We tended to look shamefully upon the foundation of our EBP pyramid (undocumented clinical experience) and praise the glory of the randomized controlled trial.