This article argues that evidence-based approaches are assuming an increased significance in many health-care fields. The core ideas of evidence-based health care derive from clinical epidemiology and general internal medicine. Despite arising from a discipline primarily concerned with quantitative measurement, the definition is increasingly found to be too limited. There is an increasing need for a more inclusive definition, which recognises the diverse disciplines and skills in health care and the variety of contexts in which evidence is used. As of yet the contribution of the social sciences, particularly qualitative methodology, has received scant attention. The concept of evidence has yet to be analysed systematically; what counts as evidence may vary across disciplines. It argues that given the level of heterogeneity, the assumption that there is a univocal notion of evidence may be problematic. Therefore the authors put forward a model of evidence that describes four distinct but related types of evidence: qualitative-personal; qualitative-general; quantitative-general and quantitative-personal. It goes on to discuss the rationale for these distinctions and their implications. The model serves to legitimise evidence from qualitative studies and places it on an equal footing with other forms of research, thereby increasing the range of admissible evidence in health-care decision-making. If the Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) is to become more accepted and better integrated into health care then the concept of evidence will have to be robust enough to resonate with the wider health care community.

(Paraphrased from the article)

Back to EBP bibliography index