3 ms·
Indeed. One issue we have today is a glut of scientific information, some of which is high quality and some isn't. Also, some will later be shown to be false, a
by austinjp 5y ago
Indeed. One issue we have today is a glut of scientific information, some of which is high quality and some isn't. Also, some will later be shown to be false, and some correct, in any given context.
It's not enough to say simply that a study exists (even if it is a large meta-study); it's necessary to actually read it in full and critically appraise it.
But ain't nobody got time for that.... which is a problem!
- fallat 5y agoIf they don't have time to read the paper, they aren't investing in the argument enough, and at that point you know the other person is not open to being wrong, which then you respect and end the conversation.
- austinjp 5y agoOn a one-to-one basis, that might be one approach. On a system- or industry-wide basis, this approach fails to address the real issue of the significant time taken for evidence to reach patients. Simply walking away leaves the problem unresolved.