This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an eLetter
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in BJP
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by WILLIAMS, D. D. R.
Right arrow Articles by GARNER, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by WILLIAMS, D. D. R.
Right arrow Articles by GARNER, J.
The British Journal of Psychiatry (2002) 180: 8-12
© 2002 The Royal College of Psychiatrists

REVIEW ARTICLE

The case against ‘the evidence’: a different perspective on evidence-based medicine

D. D. R. WILLIAMS, FRCPsych

Cefn Coed Hospital, Swansea, UK

JANE GARNER, FRCPsych

Chase Farm Hospital, Enfield, Middlesex, UK

Correspondence: Dr D. D. R. Williams, Cefn Coed Hospital, Swansea SA2 0GH, UK

Declaration of interest None.

Background An evidenced-based approach to psychiatry is playing an increasingly prominent role in treatment decision-making for individual patients and for populations. Many doctors are now critical of the emphasis being placed on ‘the evidence’ and concerned that clinical practice will become more constrained.

Aims To demonstrate that evidence-based medicine is not new, sources of evidence are limited and psychosocial aspects of medicine are neglected in this process.

Method Some of the literature is reviewed. Ideas and arguments are synthesised into a critical commentary.

Results These are considered under four headings: evidence-based medicine is not new; what evidence is acceptable; the doctor as therapist; and the emergence of a new utilitarian orthodoxy.

Conclusions It is agreed that a degree of professional consensus is necessary. However, too great an emphasis on evidence-based medicine oversimplifies the complex and interpersonal nature of clinical care.


Related articles in BJP:

Highlights of this issue
ELIZABETH WALSH
BJP 2002 180: 0. [Full Text]  



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br. J. PsychiatryHome page
R. Hodgson, C. Bushe, and R. Hunter
Measurement of long-term outcomes in observational and randomised controlled trials
The British Journal of Psychiatry, August 1, 2007; 191(50): s78 - s84.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Palliat MedHome page
S. M Aoun and L. J Kristjanson
Challenging the framework for evidence in palliative care research
Palliative Medicine, September 1, 2005; 19(6): 461 - 465.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Br. J. PsychiatryHome page
E. JANE-LLOPIS, C. HOSMAN, R. JENKINS, and P. ANDERSON
Predictors of efficacy in depression prevention programmes: Meta-analysis
The British Journal of Psychiatry, November 1, 2003; 183(5): 384 - 397.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br. J. PsychiatryHome page
B. COOPER
Evidence-based mental health policy: a critical appraisal
The British Journal of Psychiatry, August 1, 2003; 183(2): 105 - 113.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br. J. PsychiatryHome page
A. BEVERIDGE
Should psychiatrists read fiction?
The British Journal of Psychiatry, May 1, 2003; 182(5): 385 - 387.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Adv. Psychiatr. Treat.Home page
M. Hotopf
The pragmatic randomised controlled trial
Adv. Psychiatr. Treat., September 1, 2002; 8(5): 326 - 333.
[Full Text] [PDF]