Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19876675›Full record

ReviewEuropean archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience2009

Is evidence sufficient for evidence-based medicine?

Hans-Jürgen Möller

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. How close is evidence to truth in evidence-based treatment of mental disorders?European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2012
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Hans-Jürgen MöllerDepartment of Psychiatry, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Nussbaumstrasse 7, 80336 Munich, Germany. hans-juergen.moeller@med.uni-muenchen.de

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Psychopharmacotherapy should now be regulated in the sense of evidence-based medicine (EBM), as is the case in other areas of clinical treatment in medicine. In general this is a meaningful development, which will principally have a positive impact on routine health care in psychiatry. But several related problems should not be ignored. So far consensus on an internationally accepted evidence graduation could not be reached, due to several difficulties related to this. A principle question is also whether it is sufficient to base EBM primarily on the results of phase III trials with their high internal validity. Restrictions to generalise findings of phase III trials suggest the need for additional sources of evidence, amongst others "effectiveness" studies and other kinds of phase IV studies with their less restrictive methodological standards. Attempts to regulate psychopharmacotherapy in the sense of evidence-based medicine come closer to their limits the more complex the clinical situation and the respective decision-making logic are. Even in times of evidence-based medicine we are faced with the situation that a large part of complex clinical decision-making in psychopharmacotherapy still relies more on personal clinical experience and a group consensus about clinical experience, traditions and belief systems than on results of efficacy oriented phase III and effectiveness-oriented phase IV clinical studies.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicEvidence-Based MedicineHumansMental DisordersMeta-Analysis as TopicPsychiatryPsychopharmacologyRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.