【24h】

Letter in response to 'our sufficiency-of-proof thresholds'

机译:回应“我们的证明充分性阈值”的信

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In your recent editorial, Our sufficiency-of-proof thresholds, it is reported that a technology commercialization officer (TCO) claims "since healthcare decisions aren't necessarily based on evidence, we wanted to ask a clinician to see how this therapy device is actually used 'in the clinic.'"At first glance, this may indeed appear to be a negative statement, one that implies clinicians are not practicing based upon evidence. The reality, however, is that not all practice decisions can be made solely upon published research data. True evidence-based practice (EBP), as defined by some of the originators of the concept, is defined as "the conscientious, explicit, and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients.
机译:在您最近的社论《我们的证明充分性阈值》中,有报道称技术商业化官员(TCO)声称“由于医疗保健决策不一定基于证据,因此我们想请临床医生了解这种治疗设备的用途乍一看,这似乎确实是一个否定的陈述,暗示临床医生没有根据证据行医。但是,现实情况是,并非所有的实践决策都可以仅根据已发布的研究数据做出。真正的循证医学实践(EBP),如该概念的某些发起者所定义的,被定义为“在做出有关患者护理决策的过程中,认真,明确和明智地使用当前的最佳证据。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号