Identifying research evidence relevant to clinical practice

Identifying the evidence that matters, keeping up to date and applying evidence in practice is a significant challenge for busy clinicians

When the BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine Journal was launched, about 10,500 randomised trials were indexed on PubMed. Identifying the trials that affect practice has become harder: 20 years later, over 30,000 trials are published annually. If we focused purely on systematic reviews, we would face similar problems: over 19,000 systematic reviews were indexed on PubMed in 2017.

As a result, the BMJ EBM Journal has set out to identify, and focus on, the research evidence that provides definitive conclusions and research that confirms, refutes or improves current practice.

The EBM Journal has focused on two questions:

  1. does this research apply to the patients we see in practice?
  2. and what difference could this evidence make to my patient?

In doing so, the BMJ EBM Journal can remove a substantial amount of research that does not matter.

Read Introducing the EBM Verdict: research evidence relevant to clinical practice, bestpractice.bmj, 2019.

Author: DES Daughter

Activist, blogger and social media addict committed to shedding light on a global health scandal and dedicated to raise DES awareness.

Have your say! Share your views

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.