Three ways of knowing: the integration of clinical expertise, evidence-based medicine, and artificial intelligence in assisted reproductive technologies

Author(s):  
Gerard Letterie
2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisanne S. Welink ◽  
Kaatje Van Roy ◽  
Roger A. M. J. Damoiseaux ◽  
Hilde A. Suijker ◽  
Peter Pype ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Evidence-based medicine (EBM) in general practice involves applying a complex combination of best-available evidence, the patient’s preferences and the general practitioner’s (GP) clinical expertise in decision-making. GPs and GP trainees learn how to apply EBM informally by observing each other’s consultations, as well as through more deliberative forms of workplace-based learning. This study aims to gain insight into workplace-based EBM learning by investigating the extent to which GP supervisors and trainees recognise each other’s EBM behaviour through observation, and by identifying aspects that influence their recognition. Methods We conducted a qualitative multicentre study based on video-stimulated recall interviews (VSI) of paired GP supervisors and GP trainees affiliated with GP training institutes in Belgium and the Netherlands. The GP pairs (n = 22) were shown fragments of their own and their partner’s consultations and were asked to elucidate their own EBM considerations and the ones they recognised in their partner’s actions. The interview recordings were transcribed verbatim and analysed with NVivo. By comparing pairs who recognised each other’s considerations well with those who did not, we developed a model describing the aspects that influence the observer’s recognition of an actor’s EBM behaviour. Results Overall, there was moderate similarity between an actor’s EBM behaviour and the observer’s recognition of it. Aspects that negatively influence recognition are often observer-related. Observers tend to be judgemental, give unsolicited comments on how they would act themselves and are more concerned with the trainee-supervisor relationship than objective observation. There was less recognition when actors used implicit reasoning, such as mindlines (internalised, collectively reinforced tacit guidelines). Pair-related aspects also played a role: previous discussion of a specific topic or EBM decision-making generally enhanced recognition. Consultation-specific aspects played only a marginal role. Conclusions GP trainees and supervisors do not fully recognise EBM behaviour through observing each other’s consultations. To improve recognition of EBM behaviour and thus benefit from informal observational learning, observers need to be aware of automatic judgements that they make. Creating explicit learning moments in which EBM decision-making is discussed, can improve shared knowledge and can also be useful to unveil tacit knowledge derived from mindlines.


2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 298-305 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A. Bradt

AbstractEvidence is defined as data on which a judgment or conclusion may be based. In the early 1990s, medical clinicians pioneered evidence-based decision-making. The discipline emerged as the use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients. The practice of evidence-based medicine required the integration of individual clinical expertise with the best available, external clinical evidence from systematic research and the patient's unique values and circumstances. In this context, evidence acquired a hierarchy of strength based upon the method of data acquisition.Subsequently, evidence-based decision-making expanded throughout the allied health field. In public health, and particularly for populations in crisis, three major data-gathering tools now dominate: (1) rapid health assessments; (2) population based surveys; and (3) disease surveillance. Unfortunately, the strength of evidence obtained by these tools is not easily measured by the grading scales of evidence-based medicine. This is complicated by the many purposes for which evidence can be applied in public health—strategic decision-making, program implementation, monitoring, and evaluation. Different applications have different requirements for strength of evidence as well as different time frames for decision-making. Given the challenges of integrating data from multiple sources that are collected by different methods, public health experts have defined best available evidence as the use of all available sources used to provide relevant inputs for decision-making.


2020 ◽  
Vol 176 ◽  
pp. 1703-1712
Author(s):  
Georgy Lebedev ◽  
Eduard Fartushnyi ◽  
Igor Fartushnyi ◽  
Igor Shaderkin ◽  
Herman Klimenko ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Ann Merete Møller

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is defined as ‘The judicious use of the best current evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients’. Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is meant to integrate clinical expertise with the best available research evidence and patient values. The purpose of EBM is to assist clinicians in making the best decisions. Practising EBM includes asking an answerable, well-defined clinical question, searching for information, critically appraising information retrieved, extracting data, synthesizing data, and making conclusions about the overall effect. The clinical question includes information of the following elements: the population, the intervention, and the clinically relevant outcomes in focus. The clinical question is a tool to make the focus of the question clearer, and an aid to build the following search strategy. A comprehensive and reproducible literature search is essential for conducting a high-quality and up-to-date search. The search should include all relevant clinical databases. Papers retrieved after the search must be critically appraised and evaluated for the risk of bias. Evidence-based methods are used in the production of systematic reviews, and the development of clinical guidelines. Whether a meta-analysis should be performed depends on the quality and nature of the extracted data. Practising EBM may be challenged by a lack of well-performed trials, various types of bias (including publication bias), and heterogeneity between existing trials. Several tools have been constructed to help the process; examples are the CONSORT statement, the PRISMA statement, and the AGREE instrument.


Cephalalgia ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 20 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
S Wiebe

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) integrates individual clinical expertise with the best available external evidence in the care of individual patients. By enabling clinicians to directly appraise and apply current clinical research, EBM deals with the problems of deterioration in clinical performance, information overload, and lag in application of research findings to clinical practice. Thus, EBM is a useful tool to address the problems faced by clinicians attempting to provide optimum, current care for their patients. The rationale for EBM, its principles and application, as well as some limitations, are described here.


2010 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pier Francesco Nocini ◽  
Giuseppe Verlato ◽  
Andrea Frustaci ◽  
Antonio de Gemmis ◽  
Giovanni Rigoni ◽  
...  

Evidence-based Dentistry (EBD), like Evidence-based Medicine (EBM), was born in order to seek the “best available research evidence” in the field of dentistry both in research and clinical routine.But evidence is not clearly measurable in all fields of healthcare: in particular, while drug effect is rather independent from clinician’s characteristics, the effectiveness of surgical procedures is strictly related to surgeon’s expertise, which is difficult to quantify. The research problems of dentistry have a lot in common with other surgical fields, where at the moment the best therapeutic recommendations and guidelines originates from an integration of evidence-based medicine and data from consensus conferences.To cope with these problems, new instruments have been developed, aimed at standardizing clinical procedures (CAD-CAM technology) and at integrating EBM achievements with the opinions of expert clinicians (GRADE System).One thing we have to remember however: it is necessary to use the instruments developed by evidence-based medicine but is impossible to produce sound knowledge without considering clinical expertise and quality of surgical procedures simultaneously. Only in this way we will obtain an evidence-based dentistry both in dental research and clinical practice, which is up to third millennium standards.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document