3 ms·
When a novel situation presents itself, sometimes we do not have all of data we would like and clinicians have to make judgement calls to the best of their know
by gzer0 5y ago
When a novel situation presents itself, sometimes we do not have all of data we would like and clinicians have to make judgement calls to the best of their knowledge.
We may not have trials or studies (these things take time) to back a very certain and/or specific claim such as "do masks prevent the spread of Covid 19?" What we do have, is fundamental knowledge and common sense and so typically, in a clinical setting we ask these questions when any new situation arises (as it happens often in medicine):
- Does this reccomendation cause more harm than good?
- is there even a slight chance that this clinical decision would increase the percentage chance of survival?
- is it worth the inconvenience it could cause?
This is called Clinical Reasoning. Thinking critically and clinically is a core tenet of the field.
- only_as_i_fall 5y agoI don't disagree with anything you said, and I'm certainlynot an anti-masker, but was skeptical of the parent claim which seems to be "Research shoes masks are still effective even when spending the whole day in the same room" I'm not aware of any evidence that this is the case and I worry that people are putting too much stake in masks when really social distancing is much more effective than masks ever will be.