Suppr超能文献

[循证医学与心理治疗:何种研究方法才恰当?]

[Evidence-based medicine and psychotherapy: what are adequate research methods?].

作者信息

Schmacke Norbert

机构信息

Fachbereich Human- und Gesundheitswissenschaften, Universität Bremen.

出版信息

Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol. 2006 May;56(5):202-9. doi: 10.1055/s-2006-932609.

Abstract

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.

摘要

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。

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