H12 A history of evidence-based medicine and dermatology as an early adopter
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract In 1992, a search for evidence-based medicine (EBM) would have only yielded two articles. Now, searching this term in PubMed generates over 276 000 results. But how did the ‘era of evidence-based medicine’ begin and what were its foundations? The concept of using evidence to guide medical practice is thought to date back to Ancient Greece. However, it was not until the 20th century that it started to take hold in modern medicine. Social principles calling for effective healthcare for the masses were a driving force, with British clinical epidemiologist Archie Cochrane (1909–1988) being the first advocate of this practice. Predating Archie Cochrane’s work, the early 20th century’s advancement in statistics and development of the meta-analysis would form the building blocks for modern-day EBM. British statistician Karl Pearson was the first to propose the concept of combining results of individual studies to minimize random error. Later in the 1920s fellow Briton, Ronald Fisher laid the foundation for the systematic approach by developing the statistical method of meta-analysis, first called ‘Fisher’s combined probability test’. In 1976 American statistician Gene Glass coined the term ‘meta-analysis’. By 1989 meta-analysis was changing clinical practice. Sir Ian Chalmers demonstrated that a short course of corticosteroids could drastically reduce complications following delivery of preterm infants. His work, and that of others, highlighted that lives could be saved through the evidence-based approach of performing up-to-date systematic reviews of randomized clinical trials. Meanwhile, in Canada the EBM movement was starting. In 1981 a group led by David Sackett published the first of a series of articles on how to appraise medical literature, influencing the practice of a whole generation. The actual term EBM was announced by Sackett’s mentee Gordon Guyatt in 1992. The levels of evidence that we use today can be attributed to Sackett and his book Evidence-Based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach EBM, which gave clinicians the tools to adopt EBM into everyday practice. Dermatology was an early adopter of EBM. The Cochrane Skin Group (CSG) was founded by Hywel Williams in 1997, with the clear aim of disseminating evidence-based guidelines to prevent, diagnose and treat dermatological disease. The first CSG review was published in 1999, and to date there are 130 active systematic review titles. The work of the CSG elicits tangible effects on international health policy, contributing to national and international guidelines. The work of the CSG is bolstered by the UK Dermatology Clinical Trials Network at the Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology, a group that aims to explore research gaps identified by the CSG reviews.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».