4 ms·

“‘At a recent conference, very few practitioners were even aware of the existence of evidence-based clinical guidelines,’ says Elliot Abt, a professor of oral m

“‘At a recent conference, very few practitioners were even aware of the existence of evidence-based clinical guidelines,’ says Elliot Abt, a professor of oral medicine at the University of Illinois.“ “‘Excessive diagnosis and treatment are endemic,’ says Jeffrey H. Camm, a dentist of more than 35 years” “There are dozens of journals and organizations devoted to evidence-based medicine, but only a handful devoted to evidence-based dentistry.” https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/05/the-trouble-with-dentistry/586039/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/05/the-tro...

pawsforthought 5y ago
To be fair, one should be comparing numbers of evidence-based dentistry journals to those of comparable sub-fields, not medicine as a whole. The other points are also only anecdotes. Not to say I’m not inclined to believe them, but some better evidence is perhaps needed before declaring dentistry to be unscientific.
tpoacher 5y ago
> very few practitioners were even aware of the existence of evidence-based clinical guidelines shame on them. but that doesn't mean the field is not based on science any more than an arbitrary recent conference by crackpots in maths being used as proof of invalidating maths. > Excessive diagnosis and treatment are endemic. Which is exactly OP's point on maligned incentives. This is despite scientific backing, not because of it. > There are dozens of journals and organizations devoted to evidence-based medicine, but only a handful devoted to evidence-based dentistry. Yes. As expected. Since it's a tiny subfield compared to the totality of medicine. Similarly there are dozens of journals on engineering, but presumably only a handful devoted to the use of solar panels in agricultural engineering.

4 ms·

“‘At a recent conference, very few practitioners were even aware of the existence of evidence-based clinical guidelines,’ says Elliot Abt, a professor of oral m

by usednet 5y ago

pawsforthought 5y ago
To be fair, one should be comparing numbers of evidence-based dentistry journals to those of comparable sub-fields, not medicine as a whole. The other points are also only anecdotes. Not to say I’m not inclined to believe them, but some better evidence is perhaps needed before declaring dentistry to be unscientific.
tpoacher 5y ago
> very few practitioners were even aware of the existence of evidence-based clinical guidelines shame on them. but that doesn't mean the field is not based on science any more than an arbitrary recent conference by crackpots in maths being used as proof of invalidating maths. > Excessive diagnosis and treatment are endemic. Which is exactly OP's point on maligned incentives. This is despite scientific backing, not because of it. > There are dozens of journals and organizations devoted to evidence-based medicine, but only a handful devoted to evidence-based dentistry. Yes. As expected. Since it's a tiny subfield compared to the totality of medicine. Similarly there are dozens of journals on engineering, but presumably only a handful devoted to the use of solar panels in agricultural engineering.