4 ms·

>evidence based medicine They do mention that Cochrane is only accounting for 7% of systematic reviews these days. BTW, evidence-based medicine is not the sam

>evidence based medicine They do mention that Cochrane is only accounting for 7% of systematic reviews these days. BTW, evidence-based medicine is not the same as science-based medicine. The Placebo Effect is evidence-based medicine.

lostlogin 3y ago
Only 7%?!
- Fomite 3y ago
  There are a lot of systematic reviews. They're a very popular "Grad student's first paper" in public health fields, because if you're writing Chapter 1 of your dissertation, you're already halfway there.
  - lostlogin 3y ago
    That’s what I mean, and one group doing 7% is impressive.
MostlyStable 3y ago
I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Are you implying that the placebo effect is magic, or in some other way non-scientific?
- raincom 3y ago
  Evidence based medicine (EBM) = population, intervention, comparison and outcome (PICO). In other words, PICO = RCT Randomized Control Trials. To me, EBM is medical instrumentalism (instrumentalism is one of philosophies of sciences): pick a treatment that works, without understanding the underlying mechanism. Even today, we use many drugs with unknown mechanisms of action[0]. Often times, you can find cures just by discovering mechanism of action, without PICO/RCT: for example, Helicobacter pylori causing peptic ulcers. Placebo effect is NOT magic, but we don't understand the mechanism. Good relationship between doctors and patients help recover patients. Patients prefer to see particular doctors, even if the latter prescribe same medications as others, yet the differential effects on patients (when treated by preferred doctors vs others) is non-trivial. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Drugs_with_unknown_mechanisms_of_action https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Drugs_with_unknown_me...
Spooky23 3y ago
As a comparison, New York Presbyterian hospital in NYC probably spent at least twice that deficit to put their logo on New York Mets jerseys. I’m not what 7% of reviews represents, but it seems like particularly dumb austerity measure.
pcrh 3y ago
It's a bit more important than that number suggests. For one, 7% of global systematic reviews is not a trivial proportion. But more importantly Cochrane allows for the pre-registration of such reviews, i.e. where the methodology and goals (hypotheses) are stated before the review is conducted. This is probably the most scientifically rigorous method of assessing evidence, and is not performed for most systematic reviews.

lostlogin 3y ago

Only 7%?!

Fomite 3y ago
There are a lot of systematic reviews. They're a very popular "Grad student's first paper" in public health fields, because if you're writing Chapter 1 of your dissertation, you're already halfway there.
- lostlogin 3y ago
  That’s what I mean, and one group doing 7% is impressive.

MostlyStable 3y ago

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Are you implying that the placebo effect is magic, or in some other way non-scientific?

raincom 3y ago
Evidence based medicine (EBM) = population, intervention, comparison and outcome (PICO). In other words, PICO = RCT Randomized Control Trials. To me, EBM is medical instrumentalism (instrumentalism is one of philosophies of sciences): pick a treatment that works, without understanding the underlying mechanism. Even today, we use many drugs with unknown mechanisms of action[0]. Often times, you can find cures just by discovering mechanism of action, without PICO/RCT: for example, Helicobacter pylori causing peptic ulcers. Placebo effect is NOT magic, but we don't understand the mechanism. Good relationship between doctors and patients help recover patients. Patients prefer to see particular doctors, even if the latter prescribe same medications as others, yet the differential effects on patients (when treated by preferred doctors vs others) is non-trivial. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Drugs_with_unknown_mechanisms_of_action https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Drugs_with_unknown_me...

Spooky23 3y ago

As a comparison, New York Presbyterian hospital in NYC probably spent at least twice that deficit to put their logo on New York Mets jerseys. I’m not what 7% of reviews represents, but it seems like particularly dumb austerity measure.

pcrh 3y ago

It's a bit more important than that number suggests. For one, 7% of global systematic reviews is not a trivial proportion. But more importantly Cochrane allows for the pre-registration of such reviews, i.e. where the methodology and goals (hypotheses) are stated before the review is conducted. This is probably the most scientifically rigorous method of assessing evidence, and is not performed for most systematic reviews.