On the origins and development of evidence-based medicine and medical decision making

Abstract

The aims of this paper are to identify the issues and forces that were the impetus for two recent developments in academic medicine, evidence-based medicine (EBM) and medical decision making (MDM); to make explicit their underlying similarities and differences; and to relate them to the fates of these innovations. Both developments respond to concerns about practice variation; the rapid growth of medical technology, leading to a proliferation of diagnostic and treatment options; the patient empowerment movement; and psychological research that raised questions about the quality of human judgment and decision making. Their commonalities include: use of Bayesian principles in diagnostic reasoning, and the common structure embedded in an answerable clinical question and a decision tree. Major differences include: emphasis on knowledge or judgment as the fundamental problem; the status of formal models and utility assessment; and the spirit and tone of the innovation. These differences have led to broader acceptance of EBM within academic medicine, while decision analysis, the fundamental tool of MDM, has been less welcomed in clinical circles and has found its place in guideline development, cost-effectiveness analysis, and health policy.

Therapists' Roles in Pressure Ulcer Management in Persons With Spinal Cord Injury

“…The identification of best practices in health care typically involves measurement, benchmarking, and identification of processes that are believed to result in better outcomes (3,4). The steps to identifying best practices include (a) identifying the benchmarked activity or product; (b) using benchmarks; (c) comparing data; and (d) establishing goals and activities to improve the desired outcome.…”

Asymptomatic Lesions of the Pancreas: An Overview

“…From the point of view of forensics, also arises the problem of why it had not been not suspected on the basis of the information at hand also arises [4] . From the point of view of health economics, there is the need to develop medical strategies to optimize results, minimize costs and ensure the proper application of clinical decisionmaking [5] .…”

Clinical Development Paradigms for Cancer Vaccines: The Case of CIMAvax EGF®

“…In the last decades, as the emergence of new medical technology accelerates, there has been a growing claim to assess and to classify emerging knowledge according to the strengths of the evidence (Elstein, 2004) A "Level of Evidence" ladder has emerged as follows: Evidence level Ia: The evidence comes from a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled, well designed trials. Evidence Level Ib: The evidence comes from, at least, one randomized, controlled trial.…”