Every medical student takes courses in physiology, pathophysiology, histology, and pharmacology. A new science has recently been added to this basic battery: evidence-based medicine, the science of critically searching and reading the scientific literature. Finding proof for our daily practice as doctors has begun to play an enormous role in patient care, and it shows in medical education and in the dollars (euros, yen, et al.) committed to research, both in industry and in academic institutions.
The formidable amount of scientific evidence out there doesn’t mean we know everything, however. Although science answers many questions, it doesn’t solve every problem. Sometimes, the evidence confuses more than it proves—for care providers, for patients, and for the public at large.
This Grand Rounds, let’s talk about proof. I want your perspectives on the interface of scientific evidence with health and health care.
For example, tell us about health care providers using (or misusing) evidence in practice. Tell us about the confusion caused by conflicting or misinterpreted messages from the world of medical science. Tell us about the emotions that come up when we prove things, when we can’t prove things, and when proving things doesn’t make a damn bit of difference. Tell us how good a job we’re doing translating what we know about health into the sound use of funds.
Be creative. Or not. Whatever you do, send it to email@example.com by midnight (EST) on Sunday, January 21. Please use Grand Rounds as the subject for your email, include the link to your post, and write a short (2-3 line) description of your submission. If you have never done so, please review Nicholas Genes’ guidelines prior to submitting. Please do not submit any post that promotes a product or service.
References are in no way necessary, but are certainly welcomed.
I’ll limit the number of posts I use to 30. Advance apologies to writers whose work is not included in the final product.
Now, bring it!