If not evidence, then what? Or does medicine really need a base?

by: Ross E Upshur

Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, Vol. 8, No. 2. (2002), pp. 113-119.

View FullText article

Blackwell Synergy, DOI

Reviews [Write a review of this article]

There are no reviews of this article

Find related articles from these CiteULike users

wandall, suizan

Find related articles with these CiteULike tags

ebm, evidence, evidence-based, multiple-perspectives

Abstract

Abstract This essay analyses the concept of 'base' in relation to its use in evidence-based medicine (EBM). It evaluates the extent to which evidence provides a sufficient base for health care to rest and discusses whether medicine needs a base, and, if so, what are the other possible candidates. This paper will argue that EBM is linked epistemologically to the theory of foundationalism and shows how important criticisms of EBM emerge from anti-foundationalist epistemologies and interpretive frameworks. Drawing from recent writings in the philosophy of science, it is argued that there is a need to see multiple perspectives relevant to the practice and understanding of medicine.

@article{citeulike:1152787, abstract = {Abstract This essay analyses the concept of 'base' in relation to its use in evidence-based medicine (EBM). It evaluates the extent to which evidence provides a sufficient base for health care to rest and discusses whether medicine needs a base, and, if so, what are the other possible candidates. This paper will argue that EBM is linked epistemologically to the theory of foundationalism and shows how important criticisms of EBM emerge from anti-foundationalist epistemologies and interpretive frameworks. Drawing from recent writings in the philosophy of science, it is argued that there is a need to see multiple perspectives relevant to the practice and understanding of medicine.}, author = {Upshur, Ross E. }, citeulike-article-id = {1152787}, doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2753.2002.00356.x}, journal = {Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice}, keywords = {ebm, evidence, evidence-based}, number = {2}, pages = {113--119}, posted-at = {2007-03-10 11:39:00}, priority = {2}, title = {If not evidence, then what? Or does medicine really need a base?}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2753.2002.00356.x}, volume = {8}, year = {2002} }

RIS record

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:1152787 L3 - citeulike-article-id:1152787 TI - If not evidence, then what? Or does medicine really need a base? JF - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice VL - 8 IS - 2 SP - 113 EP - 119 N2 - Abstract This essay analyses the concept of 'base' in relation to its use in evidence-based medicine (EBM). It evaluates the extent to which evidence provides a sufficient base for health care to rest and discusses whether medicine needs a base, and, if so, what are the other possible candidates. This paper will argue that EBM is linked epistemologically to the theory of foundationalism and shows how important criticisms of EBM emerge from anti-foundationalist epistemologies and interpretive frameworks. Drawing from recent writings in the philosophy of science, it is argued that there is a need to see multiple perspectives relevant to the practice and understanding of medicine. KW - ebm KW - evidence KW - evidence-based AU - Upshur, Ross PY - 2002/// UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2753.2002.00356.x ER -

RIS BibTeX