Evidence-Based Medicine and Clinical Outcomes Research

Author(s):  
Zachary M. Soler ◽  
Timothy L. Smith
Author(s):  
Derek T Larson ◽  
John H Sherner ◽  
Kia M Gallagher ◽  
Cynthia L Judy ◽  
Madison B Paul ◽  
...  

Abstract Calls for adherence to evidence-based medicine have emerged during the initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic but reports of outcomes are lacking. This retrospective study of an institutional cohort including 135 patients with confirmed COVID-19 demonstrates positive outcomes when organizational standards of care consist of evidence-based supportive therapies.


Author(s):  
Robyn Bluhm

Both evidence-based medicine (EBM) and biological psychiatry aim to improve clinical practice by basing it more firmly on the results of scientific research. In this chapter, however, I show that the two approaches have very different views on what kinds of research will improve practice. This is because EBM is a form of medical empiricism – it focuses solely on whether treatments work, while biological psychiatry is a form of medical rationalism – it seeks to understand the causes that give rise to observed clinical outcomes. I argue that EBM’s empiricism is ultimately shortsighted and that it should integrate some of the rationalist concerns with pathophysiology. I then use this analysis to draw some lessons for research based on the NIMH’s new Research Domain Criteria.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document