Sampson W
Stanford University School of Medicine, California, USA.
Acad Med. 2001 Mar;76(3):248-50. doi: 10.1097/00001888-200103000-00011.
Advocacy and non-critical assessment are the approaches currently taken by most U.S. medical schools in their courses covering what is commonly called "complementary and alternative medicine" (CAM). CAM therapies are anomalous practices for which claims of efficacy are either unproved or disproved. The author's research indicates that most medical schools do not present CAM material in a form that encourages critiques and analyses of these claims. He presents the reasons for the unwarranted acceptance of CAM. These include the CAM movement's attempt to alter standards of evaluating therapies. A survey of CAM curricula in U.S. medical schools in 1995-1997 showed that of 56 course offerings related to CAM, only four were oriented to criticism. The author's course at Stanford University School of Medicine approaches CAM with the skepticism and critical thinking appropriate for unproven therapies. The author concludes by calling on all medical schools to include in their curricula methods to analyze and assess critically the content validity of CAM claims.
宣传和非批判性评估是目前大多数美国医学院校在其涵盖通常所称的“补充和替代医学”（CAM）课程中所采用的方法。CAM疗法是一些异常的做法，其疗效声称要么未经证实，要么已被证伪。作者的研究表明，大多数医学院校呈现CAM材料的形式并不能鼓励对这些声称进行批评和分析。他阐述了对CAM无端接受的原因。这些原因包括CAM运动试图改变治疗评估标准。1995 - 1997年对美国医学院校CAM课程的一项调查显示，在56门与CAM相关的课程中，只有4门以批评为导向。作者在斯坦福大学医学院开设的课程以对未经证实的疗法应有的怀疑态度和批判性思维来对待CAM。作者最后呼吁所有医学院校在其课程中纳入对CAM声称的内容效度进行批判性分析和评估的方法。
