Meaning and measurement: an inclusive model of evidence in health care

  1. Ross E.G. Upshur1,
  2. Elizabeth G. VanDenKerkhof2,
  3. Vivek Goel3

Article first published online: 7 JUL 2008

DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2753.2001.00279.x

Issue

Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice

Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice

Volume 7, Issue 2, pages 91–96, May 2001

Additional Information

How to Cite

Upshur, R. E., VanDenKerkhof, E. G. and Goel, V. (2001), Meaning and measurement: an inclusive model of evidence in health care. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 7: 91–96. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2753.2001.00279.x

Author Information

  1. 1

    Assistant Professor and Research Scholar, Director, Primary Care Research Unit, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Sunnybrook Campus, Sunnybrook and Women’s College Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

  2. 2

    Assistant Professor, Department of Anesthesiology, Queen’s University, Kingston General Hospital, Kingston, Ontario, Canada

  3. 3

    Associate Professor and Chair, Department of Health Administration, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

* Correspondence: DrR.E.G.Upshur Primary Care Research Unit, Department of Family and Community Medicine, Sunnybrook Campus, Sunnybrook and Women’s College Health Sciences Centre, Room E349B 2075 Bayview Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M4N 3M5

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 7 JUL 2008
  2. Article first published online: 7 JUL 2008

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (81K)

Keywords:

  • evidence-based health care;
  • medical epistemology;
  • research methods

Abstract

Evidence-based approaches are assuming prominence in many health-care fields. The core ideas of evidence-based health care derive from clinical epidemiology and general internal medicine. The concept of evidence has yet to be analysed systematically; what counts as evidence may vary across disciplines. Furthermore, the contribution of the social sciences, particularly qualitative methodology, has received scant attention. This paper outlines a model of evidence that describes four distinct but related types of evidence: qualitative-personal; qualitative-general; quantitative-general and quantitative-personal. The rationale for these distinctions and the implications of these for a theory of evidence are discussed.

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (81K)