Evidence-Based Medicine: History, Review, Criticisms, and Pitfalls.
Cureus, ISSN: 2168-8184, Vol: 15, Issue: 2, Page: e35266
2023
- 4Citations
- 14Usage
- 66Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations4
- Citation Indexes3
- CrossRef3
- Policy Citations1
- Policy Citation1
- Usage14
- Abstract Views14
- Captures66
- Readers66
- 66
- Mentions1
- News Mentions1
- News1
Most Recent News
‘Health Data Obsessive Disorder’—A Modern Epidemic
“Low blood sugar” was his chief complaint, but Thomas was in my urgent care (UC) mostly because he was feeling anxious. It wasn’t hypoglycemia that
Review Description
Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is the use of high-quality clinical research in making decisions about the care of patients. Its formal origin dates back to the mid-nineteenth century, and since then, it has continued to evolve. The best research evidence, clinical expertise, and patient values are described as the foundations of EBM. However, several tools and skills have been developed and added over time. EBM has faced a lot of criticism, and the pitfalls are widely discussed and published in the medical literature. The biggest challenge is the changing paradigm of healthcare, cost-effectiveness, and changing evidence which has led to controversies and challenges in the rapid adaptation of the EBM. This review article discusses the history, conception, and evolution of modern-day EBM. In addition, we discuss why EBM has been criticized and highlight the pitfalls.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36968905; http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.35266; https://www.cureus.com/articles/126710-evidence-based-medicine-history-review-criticisms-and-pitfalls; https://scholarlycommons.gbmc.org/internal_med/88; https://scholarlycommons.gbmc.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1087&context=internal_med; https://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.35266
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know