Suppr超能文献

为专家意见辩护。

In defense of expert opinion.

作者信息

Tonelli M R

机构信息

Department of Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle 98195-6522, USA.

出版信息

Acad Med. 1999 Nov;74(11):1187-92. doi: 10.1097/00001888-199911000-00010.

Abstract

Evidence-based medicine, centered on the incorporation of evidence from clinical trials and systematic reviews into the teaching and practice of clinical medicine, explicitly attempts to supplant expert opinion, which is viewed as an antiquated and unreliable form of medical authority. The epistemology of evidence-based medicine categorizes expert opinion as the lowest form of medical evidence, superseded even by methodologically flawed clinical research. When derived from direct clinical experience, however, expert opinion represents an alternative form of medical knowledge, one that may be complementary to empirical evidence. Input from clinical experts is vital to informing the context of clinical research and an appeal to alternate forms of medical knowledge, including expert opinion, is necessary to overcome the intrinsic gap between clinical research and the care of individual patients. Even when the quality and quantity of empirical medical evidence are ideal, expert opinion will remain an integral part of the multifaceted knowledge required for the optimal practice of clinical medicine.

摘要

循证医学以将临床试验和系统评价的证据纳入临床医学教学与实践为核心,明确试图取代专家意见,因为专家意见被视为一种过时且不可靠的医学权威形式。循证医学的认识论将专家意见归类为最低级别的医学证据,甚至被方法上有缺陷的临床研究所取代。然而,当源自直接临床经验时,专家意见代表了一种医学知识的替代形式,一种可能与经验证据互补的形式。临床专家的意见对于了解临床研究的背景至关重要,并且诉诸包括专家意见在内的其他医学知识形式对于弥合临床研究与个体患者护理之间的内在差距是必要的。即使经验医学证据的质量和数量理想,专家意见仍将是临床医学最佳实践所需的多方面知识的一个组成部分。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验