The process of evidence-based medicine and the search for meaning

Rakesh Biswas, Shashikiran Umakanth, Joachim Strumberg, Carmel M. Martin, Manjunath Hande, Jagbir S. Nagra

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background and Rationale: Evidence based medicine is the present backbone of rational and objective, modern medical problem solving and is a meeting ground for quantitative and qualitative researchers alike as it culminates into applying the fruits of clinical research to the individual patient. A systematic enquiry into the evolving paradigms in EBM is a need of the hour. Aims and methods: A qualitative enquiry examining the impact of different methodologies in EBM and their role in generating meaning interpretable at individual levels. Results: Present day outcome based research deals less with patients as individuals than as populations. Evidence based medicine struggles to apply the fruits of population based research to individuals who are often not as predictable as linear quantitative research would like them to be. The present EBM literature neglects a lot of events it doesn't believe to be statistically significant and perhaps here is an area that needs to be improved on - it assumes that because associations are demonstrated between interventions and outcomes in RCTs/meta-analysis, these associations are linear and causal in the real world. While they may be demonstrated repeatedly in highly controlled environments, in the real 'uncontrolled' world of clinical practice with real people, their validity breaks down. Conclusions: One needs to make the EBM standard model patient-individual (a projection of collective patient event data) resemble the real human individual patient so that optimal EBM individual data that matches our query can be easily and quickly spotted from the dense jungle of information that has grown over the years. This hints at rethinking our entire research methodology and modifying it to suit the needs of the individual patient.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)529-532
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
Volume13
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-08-2007

Fingerprint

Evidence-Based Medicine
Fruit
Research
Controlled Environment
Population
Meta-Analysis
Research Design
Research Personnel
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Health Policy
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Biswas, Rakesh ; Umakanth, Shashikiran ; Strumberg, Joachim ; Martin, Carmel M. ; Hande, Manjunath ; Nagra, Jagbir S. / The process of evidence-based medicine and the search for meaning. In: Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. 2007 ; Vol. 13, No. 4. pp. 529-532.
@article{d0d687b544d54410bc36539e316d7ca9,
title = "The process of evidence-based medicine and the search for meaning",
abstract = "Background and Rationale: Evidence based medicine is the present backbone of rational and objective, modern medical problem solving and is a meeting ground for quantitative and qualitative researchers alike as it culminates into applying the fruits of clinical research to the individual patient. A systematic enquiry into the evolving paradigms in EBM is a need of the hour. Aims and methods: A qualitative enquiry examining the impact of different methodologies in EBM and their role in generating meaning interpretable at individual levels. Results: Present day outcome based research deals less with patients as individuals than as populations. Evidence based medicine struggles to apply the fruits of population based research to individuals who are often not as predictable as linear quantitative research would like them to be. The present EBM literature neglects a lot of events it doesn't believe to be statistically significant and perhaps here is an area that needs to be improved on - it assumes that because associations are demonstrated between interventions and outcomes in RCTs/meta-analysis, these associations are linear and causal in the real world. While they may be demonstrated repeatedly in highly controlled environments, in the real 'uncontrolled' world of clinical practice with real people, their validity breaks down. Conclusions: One needs to make the EBM standard model patient-individual (a projection of collective patient event data) resemble the real human individual patient so that optimal EBM individual data that matches our query can be easily and quickly spotted from the dense jungle of information that has grown over the years. This hints at rethinking our entire research methodology and modifying it to suit the needs of the individual patient.",
author = "Rakesh Biswas and Shashikiran Umakanth and Joachim Strumberg and Martin, {Carmel M.} and Manjunath Hande and Nagra, {Jagbir S.}",
year = "2007",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.1365-2753.2007.00837.x",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
pages = "529--532",
journal = "Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice",
issn = "1356-1294",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

The process of evidence-based medicine and the search for meaning. / Biswas, Rakesh; Umakanth, Shashikiran; Strumberg, Joachim; Martin, Carmel M.; Hande, Manjunath; Nagra, Jagbir S.

In: Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, Vol. 13, No. 4, 01.08.2007, p. 529-532.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - The process of evidence-based medicine and the search for meaning

AU - Biswas, Rakesh

AU - Umakanth, Shashikiran

AU - Strumberg, Joachim

AU - Martin, Carmel M.

AU - Hande, Manjunath

AU - Nagra, Jagbir S.

PY - 2007/8/1

Y1 - 2007/8/1

N2 - Background and Rationale: Evidence based medicine is the present backbone of rational and objective, modern medical problem solving and is a meeting ground for quantitative and qualitative researchers alike as it culminates into applying the fruits of clinical research to the individual patient. A systematic enquiry into the evolving paradigms in EBM is a need of the hour. Aims and methods: A qualitative enquiry examining the impact of different methodologies in EBM and their role in generating meaning interpretable at individual levels. Results: Present day outcome based research deals less with patients as individuals than as populations. Evidence based medicine struggles to apply the fruits of population based research to individuals who are often not as predictable as linear quantitative research would like them to be. The present EBM literature neglects a lot of events it doesn't believe to be statistically significant and perhaps here is an area that needs to be improved on - it assumes that because associations are demonstrated between interventions and outcomes in RCTs/meta-analysis, these associations are linear and causal in the real world. While they may be demonstrated repeatedly in highly controlled environments, in the real 'uncontrolled' world of clinical practice with real people, their validity breaks down. Conclusions: One needs to make the EBM standard model patient-individual (a projection of collective patient event data) resemble the real human individual patient so that optimal EBM individual data that matches our query can be easily and quickly spotted from the dense jungle of information that has grown over the years. This hints at rethinking our entire research methodology and modifying it to suit the needs of the individual patient.

AB - Background and Rationale: Evidence based medicine is the present backbone of rational and objective, modern medical problem solving and is a meeting ground for quantitative and qualitative researchers alike as it culminates into applying the fruits of clinical research to the individual patient. A systematic enquiry into the evolving paradigms in EBM is a need of the hour. Aims and methods: A qualitative enquiry examining the impact of different methodologies in EBM and their role in generating meaning interpretable at individual levels. Results: Present day outcome based research deals less with patients as individuals than as populations. Evidence based medicine struggles to apply the fruits of population based research to individuals who are often not as predictable as linear quantitative research would like them to be. The present EBM literature neglects a lot of events it doesn't believe to be statistically significant and perhaps here is an area that needs to be improved on - it assumes that because associations are demonstrated between interventions and outcomes in RCTs/meta-analysis, these associations are linear and causal in the real world. While they may be demonstrated repeatedly in highly controlled environments, in the real 'uncontrolled' world of clinical practice with real people, their validity breaks down. Conclusions: One needs to make the EBM standard model patient-individual (a projection of collective patient event data) resemble the real human individual patient so that optimal EBM individual data that matches our query can be easily and quickly spotted from the dense jungle of information that has grown over the years. This hints at rethinking our entire research methodology and modifying it to suit the needs of the individual patient.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34547772649&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34547772649&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2007.00837.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2007.00837.x

M3 - Article

VL - 13

SP - 529

EP - 532

JO - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice

JF - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice

SN - 1356-1294

IS - 4

ER -