scholarly journals Use of evidence in acute stroke decision‐making : Implications for evidence‐based medicine

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothé Langlois‐Thérien ◽  
Brian Dewar ◽  
Ross E. G. Upshur ◽  
Michel Shamy
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Acute Stroke ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Based Medicine

scholarly journals Applying evidence-based medicine in general practice: a video-stimulated interview study on workplace-based observation

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisanne S. Welink ◽  
Kaatje Van Roy ◽  
Roger A. M. J. Damoiseaux ◽  
Hilde A. Suijker ◽  
Peter Pype ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Clinical Expertise ◽  
Stimulated Recall ◽  
Previous Discussion ◽  
Based Medicine ◽  
Stimulated Recall Interviews ◽  
Gp Training

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.

Evidence-Based Decision-Making (Part 1): Origins and Evolution in the Health Sciences

2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 298-305 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A. Bradt
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Strategic Decision ◽  
Systematic Research ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Clinical Expertise ◽  
Strength Of Evidence ◽  
Based Medicine ◽  
Evidence Based Decision Making

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.

Medical ethics

2020 ◽  
pp. 20-25
Author(s):  
Mike Parker ◽  
Mehrunisha Suleman ◽  
Tony Hope
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Critical Assessment ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Clinical Decisions ◽  
Ethical Aspects ◽  
Scientific Medicine ◽  
Critical Skills ◽  
Based Medicine

Medicine is both a scientific and a moral enterprise. It is as important to give reasons for the ethical aspects of clinical decisions as it is for the scientific aspects. The corollary of evidence-based medicine is reason-based ethics. Two concepts central to many ethical aspects of clinical practice are autonomy and best interests. Evidence-based medicine emphasizes the importance of critical assessment: interventions should be evaluated on the basis of evidence, not tradition. Critical skills are therefore crucial to modern scientific medicine. Importantly, medicine is a moral enterprise as well as a scientific one. Many clinical decisions involve a combination of factual and ethical aspects. It is as important to be able to give good reasons for the ethical aspects of clinical decisions as it is for the science. Society increasingly expects this from doctors as part of transparent decision-making.

scholarly journals Impact of deliberate practice on evidence-based medicine attitudes and behaviours of health care professionals

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eelco Draaisma ◽  
Lauren A. Maggio ◽  
Jolita Bekhof ◽  
A. Debbie C. Jaarsma ◽  
Paul L. P. Brand
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Research ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Deliberate Practice ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Teaching Activities ◽  
Based Medicine

Abstract Introduction Although evidence-based medicine (EBM) teaching activities may improve short-term EBM knowledge and skills, they have little long-term impact on learners’ EBM attitudes and behaviour. This study examined the effects of learning EBM through stand-alone workshops or various forms of deliberate EBM practice. Methods We assessed EBM attitudes and behaviour with the evidence based practice inventory questionnaire, in paediatric health care professionals who had only participated in a stand-alone EBM workshop (controls), participants with a completed PhD in clinical research (PhDs), those who had completed part of their paediatric residency at a department (Isala Hospital) which systematically implemented EBM in its clinical and teaching activities (former Isala residents), and a reference group of paediatric professionals currently employed at Isala’s paediatric department (current Isala participants). Results Compared to controls (n = 16), current Isala participants (n = 13) reported more positive EBM attitudes (p < 0.01), gave more priority to using EBM in decision making (p = 0.001) and reported more EBM behaviour (p = 0.007). PhDs (n = 20) gave more priority to using EBM in medical decision making (p < 0.001) and reported more EBM behaviour than controls (p = 0.016). Discussion Health care professionals exposed to deliberate practice of EBM, either in the daily routines of their department or by completing a PhD in clinical research, view EBM as more useful and are more likely to use it in decision making than their peers who only followed a standard EBM workshop. These findings support the use of deliberate practice as the basis for postgraduate EBM educational activities.

scholarly journals Technology of Supporting Medical Decision-Making Using Evidence-Based Medicine and Artificial Intelligence

2020 ◽  
Vol 176 ◽  
pp. 1703-1712
Author(s):  
Georgy Lebedev ◽  
Eduard Fartushnyi ◽  
Igor Fartushnyi ◽  
Igor Shaderkin ◽  
Herman Klimenko ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Medical Decision Making ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Based Medicine

scholarly journals Guiding Nipple-Areola Complex Reconstruction: Literature Review and Proposal of a New Decision-Making Algorithm

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guido Paolini ◽  
Guido Firmani ◽  
Francesca Briganti ◽  
Michail Sorotos ◽  
Fabio Santanelli di Pompeo
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Patient Selection ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Patient Factors ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Areola Complex ◽  
Complex Reconstruction ◽  
Based Medicine

Abstract Background Nipple-areola complex reconstruction (NAR) most commonly represents the finishing touch to breast reconstruction (BR). Nipple presence is particularly relevant to the patient’s psyche, beyond any shadow of doubt. Many reconstructive options have been described in time. Surgery is easy, but final result is often disappointing on the long run. Methods The goal of this manuscript is to analyze and classify knowledge concerning NAR techniques and the factors that influence success, and then to elaborate a practical evidence-based algorithm. Out of the 3136 available articles as of August 8th, 2020, we selected 172 manuscripts that met inclusion criteria, which we subdivided into 5 main topics of discussion, being the various NAR techniques; patient factors (including patient selection, timing and ideal position); dressings; potential complications and finally, outcomes/patient satisfaction. Results We found 92 articles describing NAR techniques, 41 addressing patient factors (out of which 17 discussed patient selection, 14 described ideal NAC location, 10 described appropriate timing), 10 comparing dressings, 7 studying NAR complications, and 22 addressing outcomes and patient satisfaction. We elaborated a comprehensive decision-making algorithm to help narrow down the choice among NAR techniques, and choose the correct strategy according to the various scenarios, and particularly the BR technique and skin envelope. Conclusions No single NAR technique provides definitive results, which is why we believe there is no “end-all be-all solution”. NAR must be approached as a case-by-case situation. Furthermore, despite NAR being such a widely discussed topic in scientific literature, we still found a lack of clinical trials to allow for more thorough recommendations to be elaborated. Level of Evidence III This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each submission to which Evidence-Based Medicine rankings are applicable. This excludes Review Articles, Book Reviews, and manuscripts that concern Basic Science, Animal Studies, Cadaver Studies, and Experimental Studies. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document