Evidence based medicine: a movement in crisis?

By Trisha Greenhalgh, J. Howick, N. Maskrey. British medical journal, 2014

1,656 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Trisha Greenhalgh and colleagues argue that, although evidence based medicine has had many benefits, it has also had some negative unintended consequences. They offer a preliminary agenda for the movement’s renaissance, refocusing on providing useable evidence that can be combined with context and professional expertise so that individual patients get optimal treatment

Subfields: General Health Professions, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/cce9765235007b4d440c9004181d840f2e42e961

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In General Health Professions

In Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

T. Gorely

Citations in the corpus

Time to challenge the spurious hierarchy of systematic over narrative reviews? (2018, background): “More generally, there is growing evidence that the science of systematic reviews is becoming increasingly distorted by commercial and other conflicts of interest, leading to reviews, which—often despite ticking the boxes on various quality checklists—are unnecessary, misleading or partisan.(19,41) T”
Guidance on Conducting and REporting DElphi Studies (CREDES) in palliative care: Recommendations based on a methodological systematic review (2017, background): “studies is considered of highest quality to inform professional guidance.(2) In comparison, expert consensus is regarded as the lowest grade of evidence.”
Realist review (2021, background): “Focusing the review is arguably the most important (Rycroft-Malone et al., 2012), challenging (Greenhalgh et al., 2014) and time-consuming step in the realist review process (Pawson, 2006a).”