Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-559fc8cf4f-x5fd4 Total loading time: 0.337 Render date: 2021-02-26T20:27:04.876Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

Progress in Clinical Neurosciences: Evidence Based Care in the Neurosciences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 September 2018

Samuel Wiebe
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada
Bart Demaerschalk
Affiliation:
Stroke Centre, Mayo Clinic Scottsdale, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

We examine the relevance of Evidence Based Care (EBC) to the field of clinical neurosciences, with particular emphasis on feasible methods of implementing EBC in clinical practice. By using pre-appraised EBC summaries, busy clinicians can move toward EBC without engaging in the laborious process of searching and critically appraising the literature. After reviewing the neurological content, accessibility and ease of use of current sources of EBC summaries, we find them substantially lacking in coverage of the neurosciences, and therefore of limited use to clinicians in this field. We emphasize a particular type of EBC summary, the critically appraised topic, and comment on its usefulness and limitations as a tool to assist clinical decision-making in the neurosciences. Finally, we propose that a collection of easily accessible, good quality, peer reviewed critically appraised topics, covering a breadth of relevant topics, is a reasonable way of moving toward EBC in the clinical neurosciences.

Résumé:

Résumé:

Nous examinons la pertinence des soins basés sur des preuves (evidence-based care – EBC) en neurosciences cliniques, en mettant l’accent sur des méthodes concrètes pour appliquer l’EBC en pratique clinique. Le clinicien occupé peut instaurer l’application de l’EBC en utilisant des sommaires d’EBC préévalués, sans avoir à faire lui-même le processus laborieux de recherche et de critique de la littérature. Après avoir révisé le contenu neurologique, l’accessibilité et la facilité d’utilisation de sources à jour de sommaires d’EBC, nous constatons que la couverture dans le domaine des neurosciences est très déficiente et donc d’utilité limitée pour le clinicien travaillant dans ce domaine. Nous mettons l’accent sur un type particulier de sommaire d’EBC, le critically appraised topic (CAT), et nous commentons son utilité et ses limites comme outil d’aide à la décision clinique en neurosciences. Finalement, nous proposons qu’un recueil de CATs facilement accessibles, de bonne qualité et révisés par des pairs, couvrant une gamme de sujets pertinents, est une façon raisonnable d’instaurer l’EBC en neurosciences cliniques.

Type
Review Article
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Neurological Sciences Federation 2002

References

1. Saint, S, Christakis, DA, Saha, S, et al. Journal reading habits of internists. J Gen Intern Med 2000; 15: 881-884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Vickery, CE, Cotugna, N. Journal reading habits of dietitians. J Am Diet Assoc 1992; 92: 1510-1512.Google Scholar
3. Schein, M, Paladugu, R, Sutija, VG, Wise, L. What American surgeons read: a survey of a thousand Fellows of the American College of Surgeons. Curr Surg 2000; 57: 252-258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Demaerschalk, B, Wiebe, S, Jenkins, M. Evaluating the impact of an evidence based medicine curriculum in a neurology training programme. Can J Neurol Sci 1999; 26: S52Google Scholar
5. Smith, R. What clinical information do doctors need? Br Med J 1996; 313: 1062-1068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Smith, R. Where is the wisdom...? Br Med J 1991; 303: 798-799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Wyatt, J. Use and sources of medical knowledge. Lancet 1991; 338: 1368-1373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Sackett, DL, Richardson, WS, Rosenberg, W, Haynes, RB. Introduction: On the need for evidence-based medicine. In: Sackett, DL, Richardson, WS, Rosenberg, W, Haynes, RB (eds). Evidence-based Medicine: How to Practice & Teach EBM. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1997: 120.Google Scholar
9. Ramsey, PG, Carline, JD, Inui, TS, et al. Changes over time in the knowledge base of practicing internists. JAMA 1991; 266: 1103-1107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Sibley, JC, Sackett, DL, Neufeld, V, et al. A randomized trial of continuing medical education. N Engl J Med 1982; 306: 511-515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Evans, CE, Haynes, RB, Birkett, NJ, et al. Does a mailed continuing education program improve physician performance? Results of a randomized trial in antihypertensive care. JAMA 1986; 255: 501-504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Davis, DA, Thomson, MA, Oxman, AD, Haynes, RB. Changing physician performance: a systematic review of the effect of continuing medical education strategies. JAMA 1995; 274: 700-705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Oxman, AD, Guyatt, GH. The science of reviewing research. Ann NY Acad Sci 1993; 703: 125-133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Antman, EM, Lau, J, Kupelnick, B, Mosteller, F, Chalmers, TC. A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction. JAMA 1992; 268: 240-248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Sackett, DL, Rosenberg, WM, Gray, JA, Haynes, RB, Richardson, WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t [editorial]. Br Med J 1996; 312: 71-72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Davidoff, F, Haynes, B, Sackett, D, Smith, R. Evidence based medicine [editorial; comment]. Br Med J 1995; 310: 1085-1086.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Wiebe, S, Demaerschalk, B, Jenkins, M. Development and introduction of a formal evidence based medicine curriculum in a neurology training programme. Can J Neurol Sci 1999; 26: S23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Demaerschalk, B, Wiebe, S. Evaluating the relevance of evidence based medicine in a neurology residence programme. Can J Neurol Sci 1998; 25: S79.Google Scholar
19. McColl, A, Smith, H, White, P, Field, J. General practitioners’ perceptions of the route to evidence based medicine: a questionnaire survey. Br Med J 1998; 316: 361-365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Guyatt, GH, Meade, MO, Jaeschke, RZ, Cook, DJ, Haynes, RB. Practitioners of evidence based care. Not all clinicians need to appraise evidence from scratch but all need some skills. Br Med J 2000; 320: 954-955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21. Straus, SE, McAlister, FA. Evidence-based medicine: a commentary on common criticisms. CMAJ 2000; 163: 837-841.Google Scholar

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 46 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 14th September 2018 - 26th February 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Access

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Progress in Clinical Neurosciences: Evidence Based Care in the Neurosciences
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Progress in Clinical Neurosciences: Evidence Based Care in the Neurosciences
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Progress in Clinical Neurosciences: Evidence Based Care in the Neurosciences
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *