Schmacke Norbert
Fachbereich Human- und Gesundheitswissenschaften, Universität Bremen.
Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol. 2006 May;56(5):202-9. doi: 10.1055/s-2006-932609.
Evidence-based Medicine (EbM) was accepted during the last decade both as a method for systematically evaluating risks and benefits and a decision aid for therapists in practice. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) have become the gold standard for medical research. The medical community is sceptical about RCTs because many therapists are not convinced that care can be mirrored adequately enough, though. The doubts are especially strong among psychiatrists and psychotherapists. The paper argues in favour of EbM in two ways. Firstly, from a scientific point of view there are no reasons why RCTs could not contribute to improve the standards of care. Secondly, health services research doesn't amount to much more than RCTs. The importance of qualitative methods is a black box as large within health services research as the meaningful use of RCTs.
循证医学（EbM）在过去十年中已被认可，它既是一种系统评估风险和益处的方法，也是临床治疗师的决策辅助工具。随机对照试验（RCT）已成为医学研究的金标准。然而，医学界对随机对照试验持怀疑态度，因为许多治疗师并不相信治疗能够得到充分反映。这种怀疑在精神科医生和心理治疗师中尤为强烈。本文从两个方面论证了支持循证医学的观点。首先，从科学角度来看，没有理由认为随机对照试验不能有助于提高治疗标准。其次，卫生服务研究只不过是随机对照试验。定性方法的重要性在卫生服务研究中是一个未知领域，就如同随机对照试验的有效应用一样。
