False dichotomies: EBM, clinical freedom, and the art of medicine. Issue 1 (15th June 2005)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Parker, M
• Is Part Of: Medical humanities. Volume 31:Issue 1(2005)
• Page Start: 23
• Page End: 30
• Publication Date: 2005-06-15
• Subjects: EBM, evidence based medicine -- RCT, random controlled trial; evidence based medicine -- clinical judgment -- guidelines -- induction -- values; Medicine and the humanities -- Periodicals; Medical ethics -- Periodicals; 616.1
• DOI: 10.1136/jmh.2004.000195
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1468-215X

Abstract

Abstract : According to numerous commentators, clinical freedom, the art of medicine, and, by implication, a degree of patient welfare, are threatened by evidence based medicine (EBM). As EBM has developed over the last fifteen years, claims about better evidence for medical treatments, and improvements in healthcare delivery, have been matched by critiques of EBM's reductionism and uniformity, its problematic application to individual patients, and its alleged denial of the continuing need for clinical interpretation, insight, and judgment. Most of these attacks on EBM and defences of clinical freedom fail. They are based on erroneous understandings of the relationships between inductive knowledge, clinical uncertainty, and action. Evidence based medicine is a necessary condition for clinical freedom, not a threat to it, and EBM is not something to be balanced with either clinical experience or patient preferences. The art and science of medicine are more conceptually and practically connected than the defenders of clinical freedom, whatever they conceive that to be, are willing to admit.