Evidence-Based Psychiatry

1995 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Goldner Elliot ◽  
Dan Bilsker
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Scientific Method ◽  
Psychiatric Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Systematic Observation ◽  
Common Error ◽  
The Common ◽  
Based Medicine ◽  
Psychiatric Problems ◽  
Evidence Based Decision Making

Objective To apply the evidence-based medicine paradigm to the domain of psychiatric practice and to bring out the consequences for psychiatry of this approach in order to foster the emergence of an evidence-based psychiatry. Method The basic assumptions of traditional and evidence-based paradigms, as delineated by the Evidence-Based Working Group, are used to structure an exploration of the evidence-based approach to psychiatry. Theoretical and practical issues are considered and an example of evidence-based decision making is given. Results An evidence-based approach to psychiatry is described as one that emphasizes the importance of systematic observation and the use of rules of evidence in hypothesis testing. It is suggested that psychiatrists using this approach will be in a position to provide superior patient care. Discussion The application of scientific method to psychiatric problems is discussed as the essence of an evidence-based approach. The common error of “scientism” is described. The authors identify advantages and limitations of an evidence-based approach to psychiatric practice and advocate a decision-making process that balances individualized clinical acumen (phronesis) and information derived from empirical study of groups of patients (techne).

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.

Evidence-Based Practice and Public Health

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Bryant ◽  
Peter D Hurd ◽  
Ardis Hanson
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Health Practice ◽  
Standards Of Care ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Clinical Knowledge ◽  
Health Practice ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
Based Medicine ◽  
Evidence Based Decision Making

The most difficult step of evidence-based medicine (EBM) and evidence-based public health (EBPH) is to link the evidence with current clinical knowledge and experience, especially with the continued focus on using evidence in decision-making. Standards of care and clinical practice guidelines are now established and reported using nationally and globally recognized protocols to ensure standard nomenclature and clinical crosswalks. This chapter examines relevant background issues, including concepts underlying EBM, EBPH, and definitions of evidence; describes key analytic tools to enhance the adoption of evidence-based decision-making; and finishes with challenges and opportunities for implementation in public health practice.

scholarly journals Dari Penelitian Ke Praktek Kedokteran

Sari Pediatri ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 42
Author(s):  
Dody Firmanda
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Clinical Governance ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Organizational Cultures ◽  
Clinical Leadership ◽  
Based Medicine ◽  
Evidence Based Health Care ◽  
Evidence Based Decision Making

Salah satu komponen latar belakang dari tujuan dilakukannya suatu penelitian adalah relevansi penelitian tersebut terhadap kemajuan ilmu pengetahuan, membuat kebijakan (policy) klinis dalam penatalaksanaan pasien secara individu ataupun kelompok serta kebijakan kesehatan secara lebih luas dalam suatu sistem tingkat institusi penyelenggara kesehatan baik tingkat rumah sakit (standard of procedures) maupun nasional (guidelines). Pada abad 21 ini dengan semakin meningkatnya tekanan dan tuntutan, pesatnya perkembangan teknologi kedokteran/kesehatan dan semakin terbatasnya sumber dana serta perubahan globalisasi, diharapkan pengambilan keputusan yang tepat dan baik akan bergeser ke arah ‘Evidence-based decision making’. “Evidence-based Medicine (EBM)” dan “Evidence-based Health Care (EBHC)” adalah cara pendekatan untuk mengambil keputusan dalam penatalaksanaan pasien (dan atau penyelenggaraan pelayanan kesehatan) secara eksplisit dan sistematis berdasarkan bukti penelitian terakhir yang sahih (valid) dan bermanfaat. Penerapan “Evidence-based Medicine (EBM)” dan “Clinical Governance” dalam suatu sistem organisasi pelayanan kesehatan memerlukan beberapa persyaratan yakni organisastion-wide transformation, clinical leadership dan positive organizational cultures. 

scholarly journals L'assistenza sanitaria basata sul valore

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 227-228
Author(s):  
Giovanni Battista Zito
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Cost Reduction ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Related Concept ◽  
New Approach ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Based Medicine ◽  
Evidence Based Decision Making

In the last decades, paternalistic medicine based on the principles of “science and conscience”, has been definitively replaced by evidence-based medicine, in order to ensure that only interventions with strong evidence of clinical efficacy/utility will be used. Evidence-based medicine, however, has two main limitations. The first one is that it fits with difficulty to the individual pa-tient. To overcome this limitation, precision medicine has been founded. The second and main limitation is that evidence-based medicine and the related concept of clinical appropriateness do not consider the costs of health services. Clinical appropriate-ness should therefore be closely associated with organizing appropriateness, to give absolute relevance to both the concepts of risk/effectiveness and cost/effectiveness of the healthcare. Accordingly, every intervention aimed at improving individual and public health should include evidence-based decision making, quality improvement and cost reduction. These features are all nec-essary but not sufficient. A new approach is emerging, called value-based healthcare, which aims to privilege activities capable of generating value, in a new model of healtcare in which interventions are reimbursed on the base of the results obtained on the whole community health.

Statistical formats to optimize evidence-based decision making: A behavioral approach

2014 ◽  
Vol 67 (5) ◽  
pp. 790-794 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iván Arribas ◽  
Irene Comeig ◽  
Amparo Urbano ◽  
José Vila
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Behavioral Approach ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Evidence Based Decision Making

scholarly journals Implementing evidence-based assessment and selection in organizations: A review and an agenda for future research

2020 ◽  
pp. 204138662098341
Author(s):  
Marvin Neumann ◽  
A. Susan M. Niessen ◽  
Rob R. Meijer
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Self Determination Theory ◽  
Assessment Methods ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Assessment Instruments ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Assessment Practice ◽  
Outcome Feedback ◽  
Evidence Based Decision Making

In personnel- and educational selection, a substantial gap exists between research and practice, since evidence-based assessment instruments and decision-making procedures are underutilized. We provide an overview of studies that investigated interventions to encourage the use of evidence-based assessment methods, or factors related to their use. The most promising studies were grounded in self-determination theory. Training and autonomy in the design of evidence-based assessment methods were positively related to their use, while negative stakeholder perceptions decreased practitioners’ intentions to use evidence-based assessment methods. Use of evidence-based decision-making procedures was positively related to access to such procedures, information to use it, and autonomy over the procedure, but negatively related to receiving outcome feedback. A review of the professional selection literature showed that the implementation of evidence-based assessment was hardly discussed. We conclude with an agenda for future research on encouraging evidence-based assessment practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document