Pragmatic Versus Evidence Based Medicine-it's not either-or.

IF 7.3 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Piotr Szawarski, David Hillebrandt
{"title":"Pragmatic Versus Evidence Based Medicine-it's not either-or.","authors":"Piotr Szawarski, David Hillebrandt","doi":"10.1093/qjmed/hcaf086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Pragmatism in medicine remains largely unacknowledged, undefined and un-described. We argue that it should not be viewed as an antithesis to evidence based approach, but rather as a way of solving a clinical problem whilst acknowledging limitations arising from the context in which the care is provided. The imperfection of the approach may be its strength, as uncertainty demands continuous re-appraisal of the situation. Existence of readily available evidence, compiled in a guideline may be an advantage, but is not a prerequisite for success. Indeed, the evidence based approach is not perfect and its application meets a number of limitations. We would like to assert that pragmatic approach focused on seeking the most available, given therapeutic context, solutions remains the most available and efficient in present day medical practice. It fills many holes between the academic perfection of research and vast heterogeneity of individual patients and clinical contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":20806,"journal":{"name":"QJM: An International Journal of Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"QJM: An International Journal of Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/qjmed/hcaf086","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Pragmatism in medicine remains largely unacknowledged, undefined and un-described. We argue that it should not be viewed as an antithesis to evidence based approach, but rather as a way of solving a clinical problem whilst acknowledging limitations arising from the context in which the care is provided. The imperfection of the approach may be its strength, as uncertainty demands continuous re-appraisal of the situation. Existence of readily available evidence, compiled in a guideline may be an advantage, but is not a prerequisite for success. Indeed, the evidence based approach is not perfect and its application meets a number of limitations. We would like to assert that pragmatic approach focused on seeking the most available, given therapeutic context, solutions remains the most available and efficient in present day medical practice. It fills many holes between the academic perfection of research and vast heterogeneity of individual patients and clinical contexts.

实用主义与循证医学——不是非此即彼。
医学中的实用主义在很大程度上仍未得到承认、未定义和未描述。我们认为,它不应该被视为基于证据的方法的对立面,而是作为一种解决临床问题的方法,同时承认在提供护理的背景下产生的局限性。这种方法的不完善之处可能是它的长处,因为不确定性要求不断地重新评估局势。在指南中编写的现成证据的存在可能是一种优势,但不是成功的先决条件。事实上,基于证据的方法并不完美,它的应用也遇到了一些限制。我们要断言,在当前的医疗实践中,注重寻求最可行的治疗方案的务实方法仍然是最可行和最有效的。它填补了学术研究的完美与个体患者和临床环境的巨大异质性之间的许多漏洞。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
5.30%
发文量
263
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: QJM, a renowned and reputable general medical journal, has been a prominent source of knowledge in the field of internal medicine. With a steadfast commitment to advancing medical science and practice, it features a selection of rigorously reviewed articles. Released on a monthly basis, QJM encompasses a wide range of article types. These include original papers that contribute innovative research, editorials that offer expert opinions, and reviews that provide comprehensive analyses of specific topics. The journal also presents commentary papers aimed at initiating discussions on controversial subjects and allocates a dedicated section for reader correspondence. In summary, QJM's reputable standing stems from its enduring presence in the medical community, consistent publication schedule, and diverse range of content designed to inform and engage readers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信