ArticleHawai'i journal of medicine & public health : a journal of Asia Pacific Medicine & Public Health2012
The care and feeding of evidence based medicine.
Article in Hawai'i journal of medicine & public health : a journal of Asia Pacific Medicine & Public Health, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Wide interest in evidence based medicine (EBM) and its value in patient care, insurance payment decisions, and public health planning has triggered intense medical journal and media coverage that merits review, explanation, and comment. Published EBM data vary in quality for reasons that have been the subject of many perceptive literature reviews. Study design can be faulted, and conflicts of interest, personal and economic, can potentially bias study results and their publication. Practical guides for data evaluation are presented here, with discussion of technical and sociological issues that affect information quality and its clinical application. Clinical practice often appears to resist good evidence in making clinical choices. Personal views of some practicing physicians about EBM are presented that underlie the occasional difficulties in applying valid research information in patient care. Improvements in study design and publication standards may enhance the clinical application of evidence-based information. EBM guided practice holds promise to improve outcomes and expense, to standardize and streamline process in ways that make for much safer patient care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22532934PMC3332120W117708672What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.