The hard art of soft science: Evidence-Based Medicine, Reasoned Medicine or both?
Article first published online: 25 JUL 2006
Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
Special Issue: Evidence Based Medicine Part 2
Volume 12, Issue 4, pages 410–419, August 2006
How to Cite
Jenicek, M. (2006), The hard art of soft science: Evidence-Based Medicine, Reasoned Medicine or both?. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 12: 410–419. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2006.00718.x
- Issue published online: 25 JUL 2006
- Article first published online: 25 JUL 2006
- Accepted for publication: 15 November 2005
- critical thinking;
- evidence-based medicine;
In the past 14 years, Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) has enjoyed unprecedented developments and gained widespread acceptance among health professionals. However, should we be content with producing, critically appraising and using the best evidence available for our understanding of health problems and decision making about them? Are our convictions about EBM’s relevance, our conviction and intellectual satisfaction with its mastery and adoption enough? Should we continue pushing forward along this promising path, or should we further diversify the content and scope of EBM? Is EBM the only way to view medicine in the near future? This paper presents some options to choose from in terms of direction and content as well as questions to answer given the current EBM crossroads. More intensive and extensive EBM combined with ‘other features’-based medicines may be the preferred strategy to follow in the future to determine the development, use and evaluation of EBM. Argument-based medicine or Reasoned Medicine is one of the options that can be integrated into the mainstream of medical reasoning and decision making.