The Editor and Publisher regret the delay to the publication of:

Lake, Alfred P. J. (2006) EBM for the future. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice12 (4), 433–437

and the error which was published in this paper.

It is important to note the author was proposing a shift in emphasis from the purists’ EBM to Evidence-BackedMedicine. Two corrected sections of this article are printed below:

What is evidence?

Page 434, right column, line 3:

  • • 
    Presumptive evidence is the highly probable, is this our daily practice of EBM?

Are we all simply semantically challenged, applying a narrow definition of evidence to make the situation more difficult than it needs to be?

Is the promotion of Evidence Based Medicine simply an (over)response to clinical freedom, which itself may be considered to over-emphasise the individual doctor/patient relationship; abused by those who refuse to support an intervention unless it is fully evidence-based?

Page 434, right column, line 38:

Medicine is not now, and never has been, an exact science. Rather, it involves treating a variably functioning inherently complex system and cannot therefore rely on pure reasoning based upon clinical studies; why pretend? Is Evidence Based Medicine as seemingly promoted any more than a grand pretence?

2005 and beyond.

Page 438, final paragraph:

The practice of EBM can, therefore, be firmed up, without necessarily hamstringing the doctor, to deliver the right balance, ensure safe and effective care and embrace in conjunction other approaches to the same end. EBM needs to be transmogrified and become all encompassing to a composite Evidence-Backed Medicine and deliver benefit to all patients.