Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluating Evidence

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Difficult Decisions in Colorectal Surgery

Part of the book series: Difficult Decisions in Surgery: An Evidence-Based Approach ((DDSURGERY))

  • 155 Accesses

Abstract

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is an approach to clinical decision-making that emphasizes the use of the best available evidence to guide clinical practice. The term was first coined by Gordon Guyatt from McMaster University in Canada in the 1990s. [1] EBM involves critically evaluating evidence to determine validity, relevance, and applicability to particular clinical situations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Thoma A, Eaves FF. A brief history of evidence-based medicine (EBM) and the contributions of Dr David Sackett. Aesthet Surg J. 2015;35:NP261–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper: the basics of evidence-based medicine and healthcare. Wiley; 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Arya S, Schwartz TA, Ghaferi AA. Practical guide to meta-analysis. JAMA Surg. 2020;155:430.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Brasel K, Haider A, Haukoos J. Practical guide to survey research. JAMA Surg. 2020;155:351.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Brooke BS, Kaji AH, Itani KMF. Practical guide to cost-effectiveness analysis. JAMA Surg. 2020;155:250.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Davidson GH, Haukoos JS, Feldman LS. Practical guide to assessment of patient-reported outcomes. JAMA Surg. 2020;155:432.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dossett LA, Kaji AH, Dimick JB. Practical guide to mixed methods. JAMA Surg. 2020;155:254.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Merkow RP, Schwartz TA, Nathens AB. Practical guide to comparative effectiveness research using observational data. JAMA Surg. 2020;155:349–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Neuman HB, Kaji AH, Haut ER. Practical guide to implementation science. JAMA Surg. 2020;155:434.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Scott JW, Schwartz TA, Dimick JB. Practical guide to health policy evaluation using observational data. JAMA Surg. 2020;155:353.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Segev DL, Haukoos JS, Pawlik TM. Practical guide to decision analysis. JAMA Surg. 2020;155:436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Van Spall HG, Toren A, Kiss A, Fowler RA. Eligibility criteria of randomized controlled trials published in high-impact general medical journals: a systematic sampling review. JAMA. 2007;297(11):1233–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Popovic A, Huecker MR. Study Bias. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; 2022.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ambrosius WT. Topics in biostatistics. Humana Press; 2007.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  15. Guo S, Fraser M, Chen Q. Propensity score analysis: recent debate and discussion. J Soc Soc Work Res. 2020;11:463–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Groenwold RHH, Van Deursen AMM, Hoes AW, Hak E. Poor quality of reporting confounding bias in observational intervention studies: a systematic review. Ann Epidemiol. 2008;18:746–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Guyatt GH, et al. GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence—publication bias. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:1277–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Greenland S, et al. Statistical tests, P values, confidence intervals, and power: a guide to misinterpretations. Eur J Epidemiol. 2016;31:337–50.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Rochester, Division of Colorectal Surgery, Rochester, NY, USA

    Zhaomin Xu

  2. Cleveland Clinic Florida, Department of Colorectal Surgery, Port St. Lucie, FL, USA

    Bradford Sklow

Authors
  1. Zhaomin Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bradford Sklow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bradford Sklow .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Medical Center, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

    Konstantin Umanskiy

  2. Medical Center, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

    Neil Hyman

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Xu, Z., Sklow, B. (2023). Evaluating Evidence. In: Umanskiy, K., Hyman, N. (eds) Difficult Decisions in Colorectal Surgery. Difficult Decisions in Surgery: An Evidence-Based Approach. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42303-1_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42303-1_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-42302-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-42303-1

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation