The understanding of terms in evidence-based medicine: a pilot study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/edn.143Keywords:
Evidence-based medicine, risk, healthcare professionals, patients, diabetes, languageAbstract
AbstractBackground: A questionnaire was developed to investigate the differences in frequency of usage and the understood meaning of 10 terms used in evidence-based medicine.
Method: The questionnaire was administered to a group of healthcare professionals (64), medical students (71) and patients with diabetes (69). The frequency of use on a yes/no basis and a profile of usage by participants choosing alternatives a–d were recorded.
Results: The findings showed that significant differences in the frequency of usage of terms such as ‘risk factor’ and ‘relative risk’ and the concept of ‘number needed to treat’ occurred between the three participant groups (p<0.001). The findings also showed that the considered meaning out of the four options offered for some of these ‘terms’ differed significantly between the three participant groups, eg ‘probable’ and ‘risk factor’ (p<0.001).
Conclusion: We should be aware of the frequency with which we use these words and the meanings attached to them, both from our own and our patients’ perspectives, and clarify this. We propose that further investigation is warranted.
Downloads
References
Department of Health (UK) Quality and Outcomes Framework Guidance. 2004. Available at: www.dh.gov.uk/en/Healthcare/Primarycare/Primarycarecontracting/Q0F/index.htm [Accessed 3.9.09].
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Type 2 diabetes: The management of Type 2 diabetes. 2008 NICE Guideline (CG 66). Available at: http:www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/CG66FullGuideline0509.pdf [Accessed 3.9.09].
Home PD, Review article, -Impact of the UKPDS - an overview. Diabetic Medicine 2008; 25 (Suppl 2): 2–8.
Jhawar S. Practical steps to evidence based medicine (EBM). Ind J Practising Doctor 2006; 3 (1). www.indmedica.com/journals.php?journalidissueid74arti-cleid956actionarticle.
Sackett DL, Rosenberg WMC, Muir Gray JA et al. evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ 1996; 312: 71–72.
United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Tight blood pressure control and risk of macrovascular and macrovascular complications in type 2 diabetes. UKPDS 38. BMJ 1998; 317: 703–712.
United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Effect of intensive blood glucose control with metformin on complications in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes. UKPDS 34. Lancet 1998; 352: 854–865.
Collins R, Armitage J, Parish S et al. MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study of cholesterol-lowering with simvastatin in 5963 people with diabetes: a randomized placebo controlled trial. Lancet 2003; 361: 2005–2016.
Costa J, Borges M, David C, Vaz Carnerio A. Efficacy of lipid lowering drug treatment for diabetic and non-diabetic patients: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2006; 332: 1115–1124.
Hamilton C, Adolphs S, Nerlich B, The meanings of 'risk': a view from corpus linguistics. Discourse Society 2007; 18: 163–168.
Malmfors T,Rosing H. Introduction-risk from a philosophy of science point of view. Toxicology 2002; 181–182: 109–113.
Calman KC. Cancer: Science and society and the communication of risk. BMJ 1996; 131: 799–802.
Cates C.. No need to be confused. Update 2005; 15 September: 89. Available at: www.nntonline.net/ebm/newsletter/2005/September/No_Need_To_Be_Confused.pdf [Accessed 3.9.09].
Sedwick P, Hall A. Teaching medical students and doctors how to communicate risk (Editorial). BMJ 2003; 327: 694–695.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2009 Copyright © 2009 FEND
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
